Trust me on this one -- it's best for everyone to not try to argue about Sonic Unleashed with TSR. For some reason the discussions always get... heated.
At any rate, Gamesindustry has an interesting article on how it's not too late to turn Vita around.
That's not to say that Vita can't pull itself out of this slump with some strategic (and truly excellent) software titles. More than anything else, that's exactly what the console needs - superb software that puts clear blue water between the capabilities of Vita and of 3DS, while also making the difference between Vita and iOS devices more clearly defined. That software needs to accomplish some difficult things. It needs to be a handheld title (not a home console title shoe-horned onto a smaller device, despite the dull refrain of "console quality!" we hear from so many publishers and developers), but one which leverages the power and capabilities of Vita to great effect. It needs to build fantastic word of mouth. And once Sony has one title that achieves that, it needs to repeat the success again. And again.
That's tantamount to saying Sony needs to create a new Pokemon or Monster Hunter for Vita. Well yeah. Duh. Anyone could have told you that :-P
I think they should have gone on to point out why Soul Sacrifice probably wont be that game.
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Don't know if this was posted earlier, but I thought it was interesting. Logitech gave one of the bigger video game kickstarter (Grim Dawn) projects a number of gaming mice for use as a donation reward tier. I wonder if we could start seeing more of this in the future - small corporate sponsorship of indie kickstarters via donated rewards.
That's... actually a really cool thing, as long as the companies involved don't influence the game itself.
More importantly, though, I hope that Logitech gave them some backing, officially or unofficially. That probably means more in the end -- though given the way the crowdsourcing rewards have been, that probably contradicts my first statement.
Huh. Outside of Theme Hospital, there is only Theme Aquarium. I would have thought that shovelware developers would have been on that like weeaboos on pocky.
Don't know if this was posted earlier, but I thought it was interesting. Logitech gave one of the bigger video game kickstarter (Grim Dawn) projects a number of gaming mice for use as a donation reward tier. I wonder if we could start seeing more of this in the future - small corporate sponsorship of indie kickstarters via donated rewards.
That's... actually a really cool thing, as long as the companies involved don't influence the game itself.
More importantly, though, I hope that Logitech gave them some backing, officially or unofficially. That probably means more in the end -- though given the way the crowdsourcing rewards have been, that probably contradicts my first statement.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like a "brought to you in part by" thing in the credits if a company helps an indie developer.
Time and again, Nintendo can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by rolling out a superb Mario or Zelda title, or dipping into the deep waters of its lesser (but still much-loved) franchises. Sony can't.
Time and again, Nintendo can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by rolling out a superb Mario or Zelda title, or dipping into the deep waters of its lesser (but still much-loved) franchises. Sony can't.
Totally worked for the GC and N64.
Hey, at least nintendo made a sizable amount of money those generations.
Though I wouldn't necessarily use that as the sole criteria for "victory."
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Don't know if this was posted earlier, but I thought it was interesting. Logitech gave one of the bigger video game kickstarter (Grim Dawn) projects a number of gaming mice for use as a donation reward tier. I wonder if we could start seeing more of this in the future - small corporate sponsorship of indie kickstarters via donated rewards.
That's... actually a really cool thing, as long as the companies involved don't influence the game itself.
More importantly, though, I hope that Logitech gave them some backing, officially or unofficially. That probably means more in the end -- though given the way the crowdsourcing rewards have been, that probably contradicts my first statement.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like a "brought to you in part by" thing in the credits if a company helps an indie developer.
Well, that's what Splash screens are right now, right? In return for discounted use ----
Okay, I can't continue that. In return for use of their tech, they get a splash screen into.
What you're proposing is a PBS-like scheme. Which, honestly, would work. Many indy games hold up better on the "games as art" argument, so corporate patronism of them without strings attached would be a natural evolution.
Don't know if this was posted earlier, but I thought it was interesting. Logitech gave one of the bigger video game kickstarter (Grim Dawn) projects a number of gaming mice for use as a donation reward tier. I wonder if we could start seeing more of this in the future - small corporate sponsorship of indie kickstarters via donated rewards.
That's... actually a really cool thing, as long as the companies involved don't influence the game itself.
More importantly, though, I hope that Logitech gave them some backing, officially or unofficially. That probably means more in the end -- though given the way the crowdsourcing rewards have been, that probably contradicts my first statement.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like a "brought to you in part by" thing in the credits if a company helps an indie developer.
Well, that's what Splash screens are right now, right? In return for discounted use ----
Okay, I can't continue that. In return for use of their tech, they get a splash screen into.
What you're proposing is a PBS-like scheme. Which, honestly, would work. Many indy games hold up better on the "games as art" argument, so corporate patronism of them without strings attached would be a natural evolution.
Exactly. Which is no worse than a mouse manufacture sponsoring an indie game contest. It just increases brand recognition. Big difference between going "NVIDIA" at the beginning of a game and instead showing goodwill towards budding young companies and getting a little recognition in a game.
Death of Rats on
No I don't.
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Time and again, Nintendo can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by rolling out a superb Mario or Zelda title, or dipping into the deep waters of its lesser (but still much-loved) franchises. Sony can't.
Totally worked for the GC and N64.
Hey, at least nintendo made a sizable amount of money those generations.
Though I wouldn't necessarily use that as the sole criteria for "victory."
I really don't want to get in any kind of war for this, but in my opinion that is the ONLY criteria for victory. These are not causes to be championed - that's reserved for the people who make games themselves. These are not sports teams to root for. These are corporate entities (which have more rights than you ) who live and die based on the amount of profit in their bottom lines. Goodwill, fanboyism, and brand recognition? Those all lead to long-term sustainability... And that is exactly why Nintendo is still around today.
If you are in the video game industry you must make a profit*.
* -- Indies are a little different; they'd like to make a profit, but it may not be their only gig. It's one of their defining characteristics, again in my opinion.
Time and again, Nintendo can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by rolling out a superb Mario or Zelda title, or dipping into the deep waters of its lesser (but still much-loved) franchises. Sony can't.
Totally worked for the GC and N64.
Hey, at least nintendo made a sizable amount of money those generations.
Though I wouldn't necessarily use that as the sole criteria for "victory."
I really don't want to get in any kind of war for this, but in my opinion that is the ONLY criteria for victory. These are not causes to be championed - that's reserved for the people who make games themselves. These are not sports teams to root for. These are corporate entities (which have more rights than you ) who live and die based on the amount of profit in their bottom lines. Goodwill, fanboyism, and brand recognition? Those all lead to long-term sustainability... And that is exactly why Nintendo is still around today.
If you are in the video game industry you must make a profit*.
* -- Indies are a little different; they'd like to make a profit, but it may not be their only gig. It's one of their defining characteristics, again in my opinion.
Eh, I think only focusing on immediate profits is a bit myopic. While nintendo was doing OK as far as profit goes during those hardware cycle, their relevance as a major player in the industry was fading rather quickly. I think it's disingenuous to label the GC/N64 as unmitigated successes, just as it would be to label them absolute failures. In the same way, the Wii is obviously the uncontested winner this gen as far as profits and revenue are concerned, but nintendo's current market position and consumer perception pale in comparison to where they were just a few short years ago. Those are important factors for long term success. You can't be solely concerned with winning today if it looks like you're going to lose tomorrow.
The N64 was pretty much an unmitigated success until around the time they put out Donkey Kong 64. So, what, four years?
At launch, FedEx was literally bringing over entire MD-11s full of nothing but N64s. Daily. And stores still couldn't keep them on shelves.
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
See, this is where we run into problems in this thread: We're throwing around things like customer perception without any backing of what that means. We aren't privy to the market research. All we have to go on are analysts who may or may not actually know the true score.
I mean, if Nintendo wasn't influential in the market, we wouldn't see: Analog sticks standard on controllers, Motion controls of any sort, rumble, 4 player support, and a bevvy of other innovations. And yet at the end of the day, Nintendo only posted its first unprofitable year ever this last year. That's far more than most other video game publishers can say.
That's why it all comes down to the numbers at the end. Because Perception may be reality, but we can't see the entire picture.
The N64 was pretty much an unmitigated success until around the time they put out Donkey Kong 64. So, what, four years?
At launch, FedEx was literally bringing over entire MD-11s full of nothing but N64s. Daily. And stores still couldn't keep them on shelves.
I remember working for Software Etc at the N64 launch and getting 2 systems at launch with a waiting list at least 80 customers long. And, at least according to Wikipedia, there were 500,000 sold in the first 4 months.
I mean, an entire MD-11 full of nothing but N64's is incredibly likely considering they would all be shipping from the same location to the same backbone/sorting facility, but the system's launch was still the same constrained supply that system launches always are.
I mean, if Nintendo wasn't influential in the market, we wouldn't see: Analog sticks standard on controllers, Motion controls of any sort, rumble, 4 player support, and a bevvy of other innovations.
I mean, if Nintendo wasn't influential in the market, we wouldn't see: Analog sticks standard on controllers, Motion controls of any sort, rumble, 4 player support, and a bevvy of other innovations.
None of these things are Nintendo innovations.
Gears of War didn't invent the cover system either but it's still the reason why most TPS games use it.
I'm sure most if not all of those things would have made their way into gaming either way, but Nintendo certainly played a role here.
I mean, if Nintendo wasn't influential in the market, we wouldn't see: Analog sticks standard on controllers, Motion controls of any sort, rumble, 4 player support, and a bevvy of other innovations.
None of these things are Nintendo innovations.
Gears of War didn't invent the cover system either but it's still the reason why most TPS games use it.
I'm sure most if not all of those things would have made their way into gaming either way, but Nintendo certainly played a role here.
This is true.
There is a pretty big difference between "They would have made it eventually" and "They would have never made it at all" though. To say that Nintendo innovated techniques and ideas that had been in places for years or even decades before they started using them is a bit... I don't know.
To be honest, other than motion control (and even this is arguable), Nintendo has been superceded by other companies on every innovation on that list.
Like most things in life, it's not always about who did it first, but who did it best. Or at the very least is most memorable.
I'm sure it was really Sega who invented the analog controller for Nights into Dreams. But nobody really cares or remembers that in the face of Super Mario 64.
Not to disrespect Nights or anything. I'm sure it's a fine game, though I personally never played it. Just saying that sometimes life, she'a ain't fair.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
Actually it was a company called Radofin that did it first, about 36 years ago, but yeah Sega was there too. If you really want to get technical, Sony's Dual Analog Joystick was released around a year before the N64, which proves that they were not only experimenting with analog control, but dual analog control before Nintendo.
If you really want to talk about analog stick standards, the format that is standard now is the dual analog, which was originally implemented by Sony in the Dual Analog Controller (and later the Dual Shock), and it wasn't until the Xbox launched that anyone really tried to change the dual analog format, and even then MS only swapped the location of the sticks and the d-pad.
While the N64 certainly had an analog stick, I'm pretty sure the only thing the controller will really be memorable for is that you had to have three hands to use it properly.
That's about as far as I'm willing to derail the industry thread, however.
While the N64 certainly had an analog stick, I'm pretty sure the only thing the controller will really be memorable for is that you had to have three hands to use it properly.
You know, I keep hearing this comment around the net, and I never understand it. One would have to never have played a N64 in his life to even begin to think that. Is it just a funny meme or something?
Pretty sure the Dual Analogue was a year after the N64, not before. And the N64 had dual analogue controls in first person shooters with the cool as hell two controller control scheme in goldeneye and a bunch of other games iirc.
Concerning Adam Sessler leaving G4 TV, I am saddened by this.
Also surprised. I didn't realize there was a problem till May 7, and that was because I was checking online about Kevin Pereira leaving, then saw a blurb about Sessler. I used to religiously watch X-Play/Attack of the Show, and go online. But it really is not the network I thought it was.
I made the analogy: They decided to abandon the Silicone Valley audience for the Jack-Ass/Judd Apatow audience.
Since he can't disclose what happened to him, for a few years, I figured this could be a way for fans to stay in touch with what he's doing, and ask him questions about all sorts of things he was doing during his 12 years in front of the camera reviewing video games.
And I am looking forward to his thoughtful analysis of G4, too.
While the N64 certainly had an analog stick, I'm pretty sure the only thing the controller will really be memorable for is that you had to have three hands to use it properly.
You know, I keep hearing this comment around the net, and I never understand it. One would have to never have played a N64 in his life to even begin to think that. Is it just a funny meme or something?
I always figured this was said by younger people who never really played the N64 or idiots.
That's not to say that Vita can't pull itself out of this slump with some strategic (and truly excellent) software titles. More than anything else, that's exactly what the console needs - superb software that puts clear blue water between the capabilities of Vita and of 3DS, while also making the difference between Vita and iOS devices more clearly defined. That software needs to accomplish some difficult things. It needs to be a handheld title (not a home console title shoe-horned onto a smaller device, despite the dull refrain of "console quality!" we hear from so many publishers and developers), but one which leverages the power and capabilities of Vita to great effect. It needs to build fantastic word of mouth. And once Sony has one title that achieves that, it needs to repeat the success again. And again.
I'm not necessarily arguing against the article, it has a good point that games shouldn't be shoe-horned onto unfitting platforms, but the sentiment that handhelds shouldn't get console-style games is a popular one on forums. We've heard for a long time that this was why PSP underperformed and DS succeeded, but I don't think this is quite correct.
Handhelds are fine for console games. Starting with the GBA, we saw a ton of very popular console ports from earlier generations, and new games on the level of those same past consoles. Golden Sun was something we would've bought on Genesis or SNES. Same for Minish Cap, Advance Wars and Fire Emblem. This followed through to DS, 3DS and even PSP. Its top games are things like Gran Turismo, Daxter and GoW Chains of Olympus. If console-style games were its bane, then why were they some of its biggest successes?
I don't think console-specific features are all that important, either. Oh sure, they can contribute to success, it's fun to pet Nintendogs. But gameplay is always king. Some of Nintendo's top sellers for DS don't even use the touchscreen all that much, games like NSMB, MKDS and Pokemon. Games where the touchscreen and mic were shoe-horned in still receive criticism to this day, like the DS Zeldas. And the 3DS doesn't even have any features that can be taken advantage of in new ways, 3D is simply there for anyone to turn on.
I think it's all about presentation (uniqueness) and timing, more than anything else.
Look at a game like Mario Kart DS: Nintendo's first online Mario Kart, a bunch of new fun tracks, and a challenge mode...and it was released 2 years after its predecessor (Double Dash) and 3 years prior to its successor (MK Wii). It stood on its own legs and came out just when people were wanting more of the series. They gave it time to breathe.
Or look at Animal Crossing: Wild World. 3 years after its predecessor, online, new content, new presentation. Same reason for its success, though you could also argue that portable just fits AC better than console.
That carries forward to modern 3DS games. Mario 3D Land came a good year and a half after Galaxy 2, but more importantly could never be confused for being a retread of that game. It blends old and new in a unique way and has a style all its own. Mario Kart 7 came after a 3 year break for the series and introduces new features of its own. Kid Icarus is a very unique game and a long-awaited series revival. The PSP's successes tend to follow this trend as well.
Compare to Uncharted Golden Abyss, released 3 months after the previous game in the series and shoe-horning in touch and gyro like the earliest DS and Wii games.
Makes you wonder how things might have gone if Golden Abyss had a year or two on its own to satisfy the Uncharted craving. I know, that's a ridiculous prospect that would mean either massively delaying Uncharted 3 or the Vita's lynchpin launch game. That's not my problem, Sony should've considered the timing long in advance.
Conversely, how well would Mario Kart 7 have done releasing in the months surrounding Mario Kart Wii? How well would Mario 3D Land have done as a down port of Galaxy 2?
Having a series of unique games dedicated to the handheld is also of importance. There's nothing about Pokemon that couldn't be done on the console, but they've stuck to their guns keeping its best games portable. Nintendogs is another game that not only fits handhelds but hasn't been done competently on consoles in a long time, if ever. Does Sony have anything of this nature? They tried with LocoRoco and Patapon, but didn't really capture the public's attention.
Of course it's also possible that the parameters for what we expect from a dedicated gaming handheld have changed. Maybe phone platforms now comprise the non-console experiences, and handhelds have only recently needed to move on to meatier things. I could see an argument for this, looking at DS's earlier days before smartphones, and how Nintendogs DS performed vs. Nintendogs 3DS.
And it may be that in this current handheld generation, the state of backward compatibility has played a larger role than anything else in determining current success. I know that in Japan the PSP's releases continue to chart and the system continually outsells Vita, and I personally would already own a Vita along with ~20 used UMDs if it supported them.
But regardless, I just don't think the requirements for success tend to line up with what people say they are. It's not that console-style games are unfitting to handhelds. Just make them unique and time the release right!
You raise a good point. It released way too close after Uncharted 3.
Outside of the shitty tacked on gyro-balancing on logs or the pointless rear/front touch panel controls you can just use normal controller controls for like the other games (the gryo-fine aiming you can turn off is actually really good though), the gameplay is exceptionally solid and the story good. Most people who've played it, including me, rank it under Uncharted 2 but above Uncharted 3/1.
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
Now there's a rumor the next XBox is called XBox 8. Eight generation of major consoles, Windows 8 arriving soon, infinity sign turned 90 degrees etc. Could work, I guess.
If that is true, they are pretty much just trying to come up with justifications for having large numbers.
0
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
X8. Twice the PS4.
Bitwars all over again, only this time with even more abstract figures!
Oh brilliant
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Okay.. yeah. Whoever is in charge of this branding initiative at Microsoft really doesn't get it. It's hard enough going "Windows 8" and having 3 products that could be confused for what I"m talking about - adding a 4th is just going to be silly.
Okay.. yeah. Whoever is in charge of this branding initiative at Microsoft really doesn't get it. It's hard enough going "Windows 8" and having 3 products that could be confused for what I"m talking about - adding a 4th is just going to be silly.
Microsoft's marketing in general has been absolutely bugfuck insane the past few years, at least in the PC sector. It wouldn't be too surprising to see the same crap happen with their next console.
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
The Wii U obviously needs to change its name to Wii Ω to stand a chance against this onslaught of extreme naming.
Joking aside, I don't think Microsoft is gonna add that 8 after the "XBOX" name. Sure, they're probably going to add "FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS 8!" to push their multimedia set-top home entertainment box strategy as far as its wheels will take them, but calling it just "XBOX 8" doesn't really make much sense in my opinion.
Alright and in this next scene all the animals have AIDS.
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
The Wii U obviously needs to change its name to Wii Ω to stand a chance against this onslaught of extreme naming.
Joking aside, I don't think Microsoft is gonna add that 8 after the "XBOX" name. Sure, they're probably going to add "FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS 8!" to push their multimedia set-top home entertainment box strategy as far as its wheels will take them, but calling it just "XBOX 8" doesn't really make much sense in my opinion.
The Wii U obviously needs to change its name to Wii Ω to stand a chance against this onslaught of extreme naming.
Joking aside, I don't think Microsoft is gonna add that 8 after the "XBOX" name. Sure, they're probably going to add "FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS 8!" to push their multimedia set-top home entertainment box strategy as far as its wheels will take them, but calling it just "XBOX 8" doesn't really make much sense in my opinion.
Yeah, well, neither does calling it Xbox 360.
Touché.
Alright and in this next scene all the animals have AIDS.
I want them to go with something like Xboxasaurus Rex. Going from just Xbox to Xbox 360 makes it pretty hard to predict what their strategy will be, especially since Microsoft loves changing things up. Hopefully nobody from their enterprise software side goes near that discussion, or we'll end up with the Xbox 2013.
Posts
These guys are funny.
That's tantamount to saying Sony needs to create a new Pokemon or Monster Hunter for Vita. Well yeah. Duh. Anyone could have told you that :-P
I think they should have gone on to point out why Soul Sacrifice probably wont be that game.
That's... actually a really cool thing, as long as the companies involved don't influence the game itself.
More importantly, though, I hope that Logitech gave them some backing, officially or unofficially. That probably means more in the end -- though given the way the crowdsourcing rewards have been, that probably contradicts my first statement.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like a "brought to you in part by" thing in the credits if a company helps an indie developer.
Hey, at least nintendo made a sizable amount of money those generations.
Though I wouldn't necessarily use that as the sole criteria for "victory."
Well, that's what Splash screens are right now, right? In return for discounted use ----
Okay, I can't continue that. In return for use of their tech, they get a splash screen into.
What you're proposing is a PBS-like scheme. Which, honestly, would work. Many indy games hold up better on the "games as art" argument, so corporate patronism of them without strings attached would be a natural evolution.
Exactly. Which is no worse than a mouse manufacture sponsoring an indie game contest. It just increases brand recognition. Big difference between going "NVIDIA" at the beginning of a game and instead showing goodwill towards budding young companies and getting a little recognition in a game.
I really don't want to get in any kind of war for this, but in my opinion that is the ONLY criteria for victory. These are not causes to be championed - that's reserved for the people who make games themselves. These are not sports teams to root for. These are corporate entities (which have more rights than you
If you are in the video game industry you must make a profit*.
* -- Indies are a little different; they'd like to make a profit, but it may not be their only gig. It's one of their defining characteristics, again in my opinion.
Eh, I think only focusing on immediate profits is a bit myopic. While nintendo was doing OK as far as profit goes during those hardware cycle, their relevance as a major player in the industry was fading rather quickly. I think it's disingenuous to label the GC/N64 as unmitigated successes, just as it would be to label them absolute failures. In the same way, the Wii is obviously the uncontested winner this gen as far as profits and revenue are concerned, but nintendo's current market position and consumer perception pale in comparison to where they were just a few short years ago. Those are important factors for long term success. You can't be solely concerned with winning today if it looks like you're going to lose tomorrow.
At launch, FedEx was literally bringing over entire MD-11s full of nothing but N64s. Daily. And stores still couldn't keep them on shelves.
I mean, if Nintendo wasn't influential in the market, we wouldn't see: Analog sticks standard on controllers, Motion controls of any sort, rumble, 4 player support, and a bevvy of other innovations. And yet at the end of the day, Nintendo only posted its first unprofitable year ever this last year. That's far more than most other video game publishers can say.
That's why it all comes down to the numbers at the end. Because Perception may be reality, but we can't see the entire picture.
I remember working for Software Etc at the N64 launch and getting 2 systems at launch with a waiting list at least 80 customers long. And, at least according to Wikipedia, there were 500,000 sold in the first 4 months.
I mean, an entire MD-11 full of nothing but N64's is incredibly likely considering they would all be shipping from the same location to the same backbone/sorting facility, but the system's launch was still the same constrained supply that system launches always are.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
None of these things are Nintendo innovations.
Gears of War didn't invent the cover system either but it's still the reason why most TPS games use it.
I'm sure most if not all of those things would have made their way into gaming either way, but Nintendo certainly played a role here.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
This is true.
There is a pretty big difference between "They would have made it eventually" and "They would have never made it at all" though. To say that Nintendo innovated techniques and ideas that had been in places for years or even decades before they started using them is a bit... I don't know.
To be honest, other than motion control (and even this is arguable), Nintendo has been superceded by other companies on every innovation on that list.
I'm sure it was really Sega who invented the analog controller for Nights into Dreams. But nobody really cares or remembers that in the face of Super Mario 64.
Not to disrespect Nights or anything. I'm sure it's a fine game, though I personally never played it. Just saying that sometimes life, she'a ain't fair.
If you really want to talk about analog stick standards, the format that is standard now is the dual analog, which was originally implemented by Sony in the Dual Analog Controller (and later the Dual Shock), and it wasn't until the Xbox launched that anyone really tried to change the dual analog format, and even then MS only swapped the location of the sticks and the d-pad.
While the N64 certainly had an analog stick, I'm pretty sure the only thing the controller will really be memorable for is that you had to have three hands to use it properly.
That's about as far as I'm willing to derail the industry thread, however.
You know, I keep hearing this comment around the net, and I never understand it. One would have to never have played a N64 in his life to even begin to think that. Is it just a funny meme or something?
Also surprised. I didn't realize there was a problem till May 7, and that was because I was checking online about Kevin Pereira leaving, then saw a blurb about Sessler. I used to religiously watch X-Play/Attack of the Show, and go online. But it really is not the network I thought it was.
I made the analogy: They decided to abandon the Silicone Valley audience for the Jack-Ass/Judd Apatow audience.
Also, I made this page for Sessler: What will Adam Sessler write about in his Autobiography?
Since he can't disclose what happened to him, for a few years, I figured this could be a way for fans to stay in touch with what he's doing, and ask him questions about all sorts of things he was doing during his 12 years in front of the camera reviewing video games.
And I am looking forward to his thoughtful analysis of G4, too.
I always figured this was said by younger people who never really played the N64 or idiots.
I found this interesting, as I've been thinking about this subject a bit lately:
I'm not necessarily arguing against the article, it has a good point that games shouldn't be shoe-horned onto unfitting platforms, but the sentiment that handhelds shouldn't get console-style games is a popular one on forums. We've heard for a long time that this was why PSP underperformed and DS succeeded, but I don't think this is quite correct.
Handhelds are fine for console games. Starting with the GBA, we saw a ton of very popular console ports from earlier generations, and new games on the level of those same past consoles. Golden Sun was something we would've bought on Genesis or SNES. Same for Minish Cap, Advance Wars and Fire Emblem. This followed through to DS, 3DS and even PSP. Its top games are things like Gran Turismo, Daxter and GoW Chains of Olympus. If console-style games were its bane, then why were they some of its biggest successes?
I don't think console-specific features are all that important, either. Oh sure, they can contribute to success, it's fun to pet Nintendogs. But gameplay is always king. Some of Nintendo's top sellers for DS don't even use the touchscreen all that much, games like NSMB, MKDS and Pokemon. Games where the touchscreen and mic were shoe-horned in still receive criticism to this day, like the DS Zeldas. And the 3DS doesn't even have any features that can be taken advantage of in new ways, 3D is simply there for anyone to turn on.
I think it's all about presentation (uniqueness) and timing, more than anything else.
Look at a game like Mario Kart DS: Nintendo's first online Mario Kart, a bunch of new fun tracks, and a challenge mode...and it was released 2 years after its predecessor (Double Dash) and 3 years prior to its successor (MK Wii). It stood on its own legs and came out just when people were wanting more of the series. They gave it time to breathe.
Or look at Animal Crossing: Wild World. 3 years after its predecessor, online, new content, new presentation. Same reason for its success, though you could also argue that portable just fits AC better than console.
That carries forward to modern 3DS games. Mario 3D Land came a good year and a half after Galaxy 2, but more importantly could never be confused for being a retread of that game. It blends old and new in a unique way and has a style all its own. Mario Kart 7 came after a 3 year break for the series and introduces new features of its own. Kid Icarus is a very unique game and a long-awaited series revival. The PSP's successes tend to follow this trend as well.
Compare to Uncharted Golden Abyss, released 3 months after the previous game in the series and shoe-horning in touch and gyro like the earliest DS and Wii games.
Makes you wonder how things might have gone if Golden Abyss had a year or two on its own to satisfy the Uncharted craving. I know, that's a ridiculous prospect that would mean either massively delaying Uncharted 3 or the Vita's lynchpin launch game. That's not my problem, Sony should've considered the timing long in advance.
Conversely, how well would Mario Kart 7 have done releasing in the months surrounding Mario Kart Wii? How well would Mario 3D Land have done as a down port of Galaxy 2?
Having a series of unique games dedicated to the handheld is also of importance. There's nothing about Pokemon that couldn't be done on the console, but they've stuck to their guns keeping its best games portable. Nintendogs is another game that not only fits handhelds but hasn't been done competently on consoles in a long time, if ever. Does Sony have anything of this nature? They tried with LocoRoco and Patapon, but didn't really capture the public's attention.
Of course it's also possible that the parameters for what we expect from a dedicated gaming handheld have changed. Maybe phone platforms now comprise the non-console experiences, and handhelds have only recently needed to move on to meatier things. I could see an argument for this, looking at DS's earlier days before smartphones, and how Nintendogs DS performed vs. Nintendogs 3DS.
And it may be that in this current handheld generation, the state of backward compatibility has played a larger role than anything else in determining current success. I know that in Japan the PSP's releases continue to chart and the system continually outsells Vita, and I personally would already own a Vita along with ~20 used UMDs if it supported them.
But regardless, I just don't think the requirements for success tend to line up with what people say they are. It's not that console-style games are unfitting to handhelds. Just make them unique and time the release right!
Outside of the shitty tacked on gyro-balancing on logs or the pointless rear/front touch panel controls you can just use normal controller controls for like the other games (the gryo-fine aiming you can turn off is actually really good though), the gameplay is exceptionally solid and the story good. Most people who've played it, including me, rank it under Uncharted 2 but above Uncharted 3/1.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
http://www.thisisxbox.com/360/epic-games-confirm-unreal-engine-4-is-running-on-next-gen-consoles-already/
Bitwars all over again, only this time with even more abstract figures!
Microsoft's marketing in general has been absolutely bugfuck insane the past few years, at least in the PC sector. It wouldn't be too surprising to see the same crap happen with their next console.
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
Better than "Vista" in any case. Or ME.
Joking aside, I don't think Microsoft is gonna add that 8 after the "XBOX" name. Sure, they're probably going to add "FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS 8!" to push their multimedia set-top home entertainment box strategy as far as its wheels will take them, but calling it just "XBOX 8" doesn't really make much sense in my opinion.
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
Yeah, well, neither does calling it Xbox 360.
Touché.
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
And people will just call it X-Box Ate when they write it out since they aren't really paying attention anyway.