PDA

View Full Version : Is another Video Game Crash coming up?


Alakazam
05-16-2006, 12:57 AM
It's happened before and some say that it's bound to happen again, and soon - read and discuss: "Life after the Video Game Crash": http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

"The Gamer's Manifesto": http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/manifesto.html

I'll post my thoughts once a few people have posted.

Orange_Flaaffy
05-23-2006, 03:56 AM
Hmm..if it is...*stockpiles all the games I always wanted to play but never had the money for*

Kenny_C.002
05-24-2006, 04:00 AM
Interesting. There are some very valid points and ideas. There's also that fanboy one that speaks to the hardcore gaming population on Nintendo (which also brought some very valid points as well). So really, we'll see how things go from here. I'm not buying any of the three machines until much later after they are released (I've lost that "I want the newest system NOW" mentality somewhere between getting the Gamecube a month after launch and my getting of a used PS2 about a week back, with a bunch of games like Star Ocean and Makai Kingdom for relatively low prices). I'll probably end up getting at least 2 of the 3 systems and probably get whatever incarnation of Disgaea and SSBB when they come out (for the disgaea incarnations, as they disappear from existence about a month after their release) or when they're cheap (which is the SSBB side of things).

As for the whole MMORPG thing, check out the success of Kingdom of Loathing and see that even low budget MMORPGs are making an impact, with a fanbase that's wide enough to support 9-10 people for a living, making money entirely out of donations (something Blizzard, who's racking in that green with WoW, didn't do).

!CeMAn
06-01-2006, 12:36 AM
Great points. In particular, the generation leaps pointing out the gaming worlds from sytem to system(Atari, single screen manipulating sprites->NES, manipulating characters in entire worlds->N64, manipulatig 3-D environments->Gamecube/PS2/XBox, manipulating slightly more realistic fog and water effects.) I have no choice but to agree; the platforms have flatlined.

I don't necessarily agree it's going to crash, in a sense. Gaming has become so mainstream in the past 20 years that it's as staple in homes as a television. It's the audience, the aging, current market that's changing and likely going to crash.

Sure, all of us gamers who have been rocking the scene since the 80's(and some since the 70's) will stop dropping our disposable income on this crap, but there are kids already whose first system is the PS2 or Nintendo DS. They're still new to the gaming world and are not likely going to stop buying systems because of a lack of variety in graphics or overall gaming experience. No more than we did during the SNES/Genesis/TurboGraphix days.

The hump from NES->SNES wasn't all that spectacular, just prettier colours and sound. We jumped all over it. I'm confident that the second generation will jump all over the new systems in much the same fashion.

Alakazam
06-02-2006, 01:17 PM
!Ce: Good point about the SNES, but for example, compare the SNES to the GCN. Although the kids you mentioned whose first system was a GCN/PS2/XBOX would say that the GCN is obviously better, I'd say that the SNES wins hands down. It's got a solid lineup of great games, and it sold much better than the GCN did.

As mainstream as gaming has become, I wonder if the younger generation will become the sole market keeping the industry growing...how old will someone be before they get tired of the lack of creaitvity and stop buying games? Will that age be going down in future year? I wonder...

Neo Emolga
06-02-2006, 03:02 PM
Actually, I have a feeling this is why Nintendo is going one step further with the Wii. Look at games like Half Life 2 and such. Graphics... really aren't going to get much better than this, the most I can think of is more environment interaction, such as explosions blowing up any wall and any element of the environment, not such "special" areas meant to be blown up. And though it may increase the gore level dramatically, in real life, bodies don't stay in one piece after getting hit with an explosive. Voices, also, will need to be many more of them to seem realistic so that not every enemy you fight sounds the same in voice like the last two. Games may look realistic now, but they don't behave realistically all the way.

As for the Nintendo Wii, maybe it's about time that this is recognized that graphics have met their maximum and it's time to implement some other feature that catches the gamer's interest. Tossing out the traditional controller and using something new is probably the way to go. Who wouldn't want to play an FPS more like a light-gun game than having to fiddle with control sticks to actually get an aim going? As far as PS3 and XBox 360 go, the only difference I see is in graphics, and as we all know, graphics don't make the game, its only a supplement.

This is why I honestly think Nintendo is going to dominate the market, they've recognized that some changes in graphics aren't enough and it's time to go further than that.

!CeMAn
06-02-2006, 10:40 PM
!Ce: Good point about the SNES, but for example, compare the SNES to the GCN. Although the kids you mentioned whose first system was a GCN/PS2/XBOX would say that the GCN is obviously better, I'd say that the SNES wins hands down. It's got a solid lineup of great games, and it sold much better than the GCN did.

There's no arguing that. If you asked the average 25 year old which game was better, LoZ(NES), or LoZ(Wind Waker), i'm willing to bet money they would choose the original. Back in our days, games had something unique. It was worlds we've never seen before, experiences we've never dreamed of. Kids were always willing to explore that one tiny nook in the depths of Norfair, or go a round with Ganon for the 9th time in a row. Games these days, you finish it once and you're on to the next adventure/ game. What i'm wondering, is that because of a lack of creativity/unique gaming experience, or simply the fast paced society we've grown used to?

As mainstream as gaming has become, I wonder if the younger generation will become the sole market keeping the industry growing...how old will someone be before they get tired of the lack of creativity and stop buying games? Will that age be going down in future year? I wonder...

Remember, it was a young generation that first took to video games in the first place. You didn't see adults lined up in pizza shops waiting to play 1942 or Donkey Kong, it was kids and teenagers. Who all got NES for Christmas? Parents bought it for the kids. Sure, i'm sure most of our fathers(mine included) played Super Mario Bros. with us on Christmas morning, but it was the kids who got addicted and were rushing home from school to give that 6th world another shot. It was a minority of adults who found it as engaging as we did.

If anything, i think the age at which video games lose their appeal will be rising as it goes along. For the simple idea that it was kids who grew up with it that love it the most. How quick would you be to give up something that kept you company while you were grounded or stuck inside because it was raining? The writer of that article has been down since the friggin PONG era, and that's at least 10 or 12 years since I first picked up a controller.

Kenny_C.002
06-06-2006, 03:25 AM
While graphics is no longer key, it fills an important niche that most of the current gaming market is in. For example, take a look at the "fanboy" article found also there, stating that "Nintendo doesn't care about gamers". While the point obviously doesn't make sense, it shows that there are still many gamers out that who only care about graphics and those unneccessary supplements. Yes, we know this is a dying population, but we still need that niche.

Nintendo's approach to the problem is obviously to try and reach for a new market. This means it's easily a hit-or-miss, or should I say, a do-or-die. IF Nintendo can reach out to this new market they've been hoping for, they will be successful and make money off it. Of course, the flip side is that they'll become a handheld-only company.

Here's the thing, it's not about which company would dominate the console wars anymore. It's about the dying gaming industry now.

And I agree !ce, there's just that huge problem that games back then were cool and people were willing to play the same game 10 times over (like here I've replayed Tales of Symphonia like 8 times, and touched Sonic Adventure 2 like twice in total. Or how I'm replaying Makai Kingdom over and over again to get hidden characters and such...and that's a recent game with terrible graphics.).

Neo Emolga
06-06-2006, 05:11 PM
Problem is most games are just focusing on graphics now. Rather than giving the game replay value, it's more of a matter of making it look good. Storylines are stripped, are very stupid, or are cliche. Newer games lack the hidden extras that made games interesting. Most FPS games have gotten incredibly straightforward and boring, rather than giving the player the ability to "wander" like in games like Goldeneye. Games have also gotten frustrating for pointless reasons. Players get stuck and don't make any progress, or even worse, accomplish nothing but lose progress (A big thing I hated about Everquest).

Even MMORPGs have gotten stale. Killing random monsters and being an "errand boy" to do quests is losing its appeal. And people don't like the fact that in order to be any good, you have to devote massive amounts of time into a game. What would be so bad about a game that focuses more on some other competitive element of a game rather than leveling?

The problem is most games lack souls and styles. Progressing through the game becomes more like trying to wrestle out of a straightjacket rather than a real adventure. Most missions or quests are very similar to something you've already done in another game (i.e. Drive a tank around, gun down a helicopter, escort some NPC character and protect them from enemy fire, ect)

I have a feeling most of this is because of a lack for something truly innovative.

!CeMAn
06-07-2006, 02:27 AM
I have a feeling most of this is because of a lack for something truly innovative.

Or, because that's what companies love to do; Find something that worked and duplicate, clone and refurnish it. That doesn't mean there's a crash coming. There is a sucker born every minute, and EVERY game is somebody's first game so the next 2 or 3 similar to it are going to be secks for them.

Kenny_C.002
06-07-2006, 02:58 AM
I have a feeling most of this is because of a lack for something truly innovative.
And the innovators crashed and burned. 99.99% of these so called "innovative" games made it to the bargain bin with 1 copy sold. Worse yet, no major department store would even bother to stock copies of it, meaning the already low stock of the game, found only at dedicated gaming stores, wouldn't sell due to a lack of interest.

Face it Neo, innovation in the gaming industry has long been gone. There just aren't enough interest these days for innovation to work. This isn't back in the old days when wacky new games coming out get hordes of people flooding in to get the latest copy (e.g. the Zelda innovation). This is the era where innovation, done well, wouldn't sell (e.g. Beyond Good and Evil, Psychonaughts).

Dakota
06-30-2006, 03:42 PM
Someone said it before, but I think the biggest point here is how mainstream games are getting. It's like out of all the games sold now, a great majority of them are just movie or TV cash cows or games that people know will sell no matter how crappy it is.

And besides, we're the gamer generation. Back when we were all 10 years old when we first started with our N64's and what not, games were selling great. But that generation is going to college now, and having bills to pay and rent to pay and gas to pay. This new generation of mainstream, retard gamers sucks.

Snow Fairy Sugar
06-30-2006, 04:31 PM
Actually, I have a feeling this is why Nintendo is going one step further with the Wii. Look at games like Half Life 2 and such. Graphics... really aren't going to get much better than this, the most I can think of is more environment interaction, such as explosions blowing up any wall and any element of the environment, not such "special" areas meant to be blown up. And though it may increase the gore level dramatically, in real life, bodies don't stay in one piece after getting hit with an explosive. Voices, also, will need to be many more of them to seem realistic so that not every enemy you fight sounds the same in voice like the last two. Games may look realistic now, but they don't behave realistically all the way.

As for the Nintendo Wii, maybe it's about time that this is recognized that graphics have met their maximum and it's time to implement some other feature that catches the gamer's interest. Tossing out the traditional controller and using something new is probably the way to go. Who wouldn't want to play an FPS more like a light-gun game than having to fiddle with control sticks to actually get an aim going? As far as PS3 and XBox 360 go, the only difference I see is in graphics, and as we all know, graphics don't make the game, its only a supplement.

This is why I honestly think Nintendo is going to dominate the market, they've recognized that some changes in graphics aren't enough and it's time to go further than that.

I am not sure,NP..people DO look at graphics,etc...that is why xbox is more popular than PS2..Halo 2 is one game with stunning graphics,that's why..

Dakota
07-01-2006, 12:45 AM
Actually, in ceratin cases, graphics do make the game. Fanboys just don't want to admit that because they, for some reason, think it takes away their "hardcore gamer" status. It's like in real life where how good a person looks can mean a lot. Looks shouldn't necessarily be important, but they are. Graphics shouldn't really mater, but they do.

!CeMAn
07-01-2006, 01:37 AM
Actually, in ceratin cases, graphics do make the game. Fanboys just don't want to admit that because they, for some reason, think it takes away their "hardcore gamer" status. It's like in real life where how good a person looks can mean a lot. Looks shouldn't necessarily be important, but they are. Graphics shouldn't really mater, but they do.
Anybody who thinks graphics make a game needs to play a good long look at the original LoZ.
In the world of GC, PSP and XBox360, why am i spending more time finding every hidden room in the Over World of LoZ, or breeding the hell out of my pokemon in Crystal than running out to play the latest Halo game?
If you were 10 years old, and playing N64, you have no room to speak.

Matt
07-01-2006, 03:52 AM
I admit it, I play video games every once in a long while, but life would be nothing more than sophisticated and intelligent if we lost the first person alien shooters and mad killing auto-theft fantasies. Honestly, besides the unemployment of many workers, how could the loss of games ruin the lives of us, the civilians. Maybe it will teach these lazy gamers to run around and play some ball, you know? Lose some fat instead of accumulate it.

EDIT: Wow, I just realized this does not, in the least, relate to the discussion.

Dakota
07-01-2006, 03:15 PM
Anybody who thinks graphics make a game needs to play a good long look at the original LoZ.
In the world of GC, PSP and XBox360, why am i spending more time finding every hidden room in the Over World of LoZ, or breeding the hell out of my pokemon in Crystal than running out to play the latest Halo game?
If you were 10 years old, and playing N64, you have no room to speak.

Actually, in certain cases, graphics do make the game. Fanboys just don't want to admit that because they, for some reason, think it takes away their "hardcore gamer" status. It's like in real life where how good a person looks can mean a lot. Looks shouldn't necessarily be important, but they are. Graphics shouldn't really mater, but they do.

You missed a very important word there, buddy. :wink:

Kenny_C.002
07-01-2006, 03:20 PM
Yeah that's pretty much it. It's also why NIS games generally sell badly in America while being complete blowouts in Japan.

!CeMAn
07-02-2006, 03:49 PM
You missed a very important word there, buddy. :wink:
List some games where graphics made the game instead of the actually play.
No game has ever held my interests because it looked pretty. Grabbed attention, sure, but i don't think i've never been held to a game because of it's attractivness. If the gameplay fails, so does the game.

Dakota
07-02-2006, 05:39 PM
List some games where graphics made the game instead of the actually play.
No game has ever held my interests because it looked pretty. Grabbed attention, sure, but i don't think i've never been held to a game because of it's attractivness. If the gameplay fails, so does the game.

First Person Shooters, Sports Games, Racing Games...

And graphics may not be so important to you (or me) because we're actual gamers and we know what's good. If every gamer was like us (seeing as we're a minority) licensed games would never sell. But looky looky, games like Shrek and Rugrats sell like CRAZY.

Crummie
07-09-2006, 06:00 PM
Dude, I just read the article. And I must say, he did make a couple good points. But a couple lousy ones too...

Like what he said about people not going back to play games with bad graphics or that they've already beat. I mean, come on. This is a pokemon forum. Look how many people still play those old 2D crappy color games! (well I still do) And actually, I found myself playing Super Mario 64 for the past week :redface:

I, myself, have already lost interest in console games. The only reason I bought a PS2 was for the DDR games. Which brings us back to what the article said about people want games that translate our actions into the gameplay. So the Wii has the right idea. But I'm still not buying it. I guess I've already been sucked into the crash, cause I lost interest in all those new games.

That guy sounds pretty solid about this. But you never know with these theories...

Thrall
07-17-2006, 11:05 PM
I am not sure,NP..people DO look at graphics,etc...that is why xbox is more popular than PS2..Halo 2 is one game with stunning graphics,that's why..

Pfft what planet are you from? Well they both prove alot of things, grahh! I was going to say that Nintendo would dominate but Neo did....GR!

Kenny_C.002
07-18-2006, 05:34 AM
Pfft what planet are you from? Well they both prove alot of things, grahh! I was going to say that Nintendo would dominate but Neo did....GR!
I still doubt it, and quite frankly I don't care about the console wars anymore.

Dakota
07-19-2006, 12:18 AM
...I don't care about the console wars anymore.

Then you're not a real, hardcore gamer. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

That's what the game companies want you to think anyway. It's like that old, stupid battle between Ford and Chevy. Getting stupid over the whole "console wars" thing is the most redudant and pointless debate in any forum. People are going to like what they like and dislike what they dislike, and no charts or graphs or flames are gonna change that.