Personally, I think Microsoft are going to have a decent amount of hype at launch but then the Molyneux Effect will kick in and people will lose interest pretty fast. Like I said months ago, Microsoft's game division is decidedly uncreative and it shows in their software lineup. It's like they had a checklist of successful games they needed to rip off. Wii Sports? Check. Wii Fit? Check. Nintendogs? Check. Yadda yadda.
The suits at SCE are pretty similar in that regard but they've got so many studios under their wing that they still manage to pull out some neat and crazy shit. I kinda think Sony will do the opposite to Microsoft, start off with barely any momentum but grow it from there so that they actually end up with a decent Move install base.
I like that they're trying to get their current install base to buy into Move with 'hardcore' games like RE5, Killzone 3 and SOCOM 4 though. If I were to ever buy a Move, those are the types of games I'd buy it for. Hell, put Move support into Portal 2 and I'd probably buy that god damn thing at launch.
I really hope they go back and patch Move Support into Uncharted 1 & 2. Aaand both Ratchet & Clanks. Aaaand Infamous. I might actually buy and play Infamous if it had Move support.
InkSplat on
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
Personally, I think Microsoft are going to have a decent amount of hype at launch but then the Molyneux Effect will kick in and people will lose interest pretty fast. Like I said months ago, Microsoft's game division is decidedly uncreative and it shows in their software lineup. It's like they had a checklist of successful games they needed to rip off. Wii Sports? Check. Wii Fit? Check. Nintendogs? Check. Yadda yadda.
Shit, Microsoft has been doing that from the beginning. The original Xbox's launch lineup was pretty much planned by committee. They probably did a study to find out what the three most important genres are to american gamers. They came up with first person shooters, racing games and fighting games. Three of their big early game were Halo, Project Gotham Racing and Dead or Alive 3. They were also busy getting Rare away from Nintendo so that they could match what Nintendo does. If you study the history of the Xbox, they've always attempted to get one for one what the competition has or (imitate as closely as possible). It's smart but it's also incredibly uncreative, which is part of the reason I've never been fond of all things Xbox. Now they're doing it with the Wii. They didn't bring a whole lot of originality to the table because they've never been very original, just riding on the backs of others.
Did anyone see Iron Man 2? Microsoft is Justin Hammer. Kinect is Microsoft trying to be Tony Stark.
Honestly, per the Star Wars Kinect game, I would LOVE it to be on rails.
A rail "shooter" where instead of shooting things, you slice the shit out of them with a lightsaber and wreck shit with force powers? That would be awesome.
Then again, I bought both Resident Evil Chronicles games, and Dead Space Extraction, so I likes me a rail shooter.
I'd buy Kinect at $100, not even have seen anything. A 360 controller is $50 right? And its bound to have some sort of game/tech demo with it. Even for just when I turn it on my Ipod, and to play with. $150 is getting pricey for something that hasn't blown me away.
Kinnect will not cost (rumoured) $150 for the people MS is targeting. It will cost $150 + cost of a 360 or whatever a XBox 360 bundle might cost.
I'd mentioned this before but for one 'casual' person the cost is not $80 (Wii remote + nunchuck + WM+) vs. $129 (Move + eye + sub) vs. $150 (rumoured Kinnect). It is $20 (WM+) vs. $129 + PS3 vs. $150 + XBox 360.
Casuals people already have a Wii they most likely don't have a PS3 or XBox.
*Edit* Then again I could be wrong. Now that I think of it there are probably PS3s or 360s out there in homes were one user uses it and Kinnect/Move could be used to expand it to the rest of the household.
All the casuals I've seen talking about it are planning on buying a 360.
Fine, you people win. I'll now start using the terms Casual and Hardcore.
Casuals already own a 360. WTF do you think Halo is? It's the most casual game ever. Might as well thrown in all those warfare based FPSs while we are at it.
Why would you start off using the terms completely wrong? Ugh.
Basically by internet parlance, what you just said is that soccer moms, seven year old girls, lapsed gamers, and people who generally just play Solitaire and Bejeweled all have 360s with Halo.
And yeah, everyone knows what you mean, but that's just semantics and mincing words. We know that the RPG stat crunchers are teh real hardcores. But "hardcore" is still generally understood to mean blood, swearing, drugs and whores. Please don't argue this, it already hurts enough to think about it. That's just the way the word is used on forums for purposes of easy discussion.
Why would you start off using the terms completely wrong?
Yeah becuase the guy who sits around and plays MW2 90% of the time is hardcore.
That goes for Gears of War as well. Gears of War might as well be Rob Liefeld: The Game.
Ok fine. You've successfully redefined years of established parlance. Hardcores own the Wii and casuals own PS3 and 360. Tommatt meant to say all the hardcores he's talked to are buying 360s.
Now that we've defined that for the purposes of this thread can we move on?
As far as I've always understood it, the word hardcore means a 13-year-old who for some reason thinks videogames are serious business
Hardcore is those jerks who you hate and are killing the industry with their niche games.
And hell I've always been for hardcore - mainstream - 'casual'. It's significantly more useful than a false dichotomy that no one has ever agreed on since day one.
Why would you start off using the terms completely wrong?
Yeah becuase the guy who sits around and plays MW2 90% of the time is hardcore.
That goes for Gears of War as well. Gears of War might as well be Rob Liefeld: The Game.
Ok fine. You've successfully redefined years of established parlance. Hardcores own the Wii and casuals own PS3 and 360. Tommatt meant to say all the hardcores he's talked to are buying 360s.
Now that we've defined that for the purposes of this thread can we move on?
Why be a dick over it? Halo and MW2 are games that lack any real depth and are marketed accordingly for mass appeal.
It's a lot easier to hit 10th prestige on MW2 than it is to get every damn star on Mario Galaxy 2. It may take longer but there's no real difficulty involved.
Well slash is pretty busy so I'm just going to jump in here and say that it's easier to justify the use of the word "hardcore" as a description of a player or of a way to play a game rather than the game itself.
This is especially true since so few games are really hard these days since devs want you to see all the content they spent so much money making.
lowlylowlycook on
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Personally, I think Microsoft are going to have a decent amount of hype at launch but then the Molyneux Effect will kick in and people will lose interest pretty fast. Like I said months ago, Microsoft's game division is decidedly uncreative and it shows in their software lineup. It's like they had a checklist of successful games they needed to rip off. Wii Sports? Check. Wii Fit? Check. Nintendogs? Check. Yadda yadda.
Shit, Microsoft has been doing that from the beginning. The original Xbox's launch lineup was pretty much planned by committee. They probably did a study to find out what the three most important genres are to american gamers. They came up with first person shooters, racing games and fighting games. Three of their big early game were Halo, Project Gotham Racing and Dead or Alive 3. They were also busy getting Rare away from Nintendo so that they could match what Nintendo does. If you study the history of the Xbox, they've always attempted to get one for one what the competition has or (imitate as closely as possible). It's smart but it's also incredibly uncreative, which is part of the reason I've never been fond of all things Xbox. Now they're doing it with the Wii. They didn't bring a whole lot of originality to the table because they've never been very original, just riding on the backs of others.
Did anyone see Iron Man 2? Microsoft is Justin Hammer. Kinect is Microsoft trying to be Tony Stark.
Oh I've noticed it and brought it up plenty (much to Sheep's annoyance), I just think it's more obvious than ever right now. I also think it's a pretty bad move when you're trying to sell an optional peripheral using mostly first party software (because as third parties have shown on the Wii, they're clearly not reliable). The main reason why the Wii got popular in the first place was because it was new, not the same shit other people have done.
I still don't know how they've convinced some people that Kinect's innovative. It's an Eyetoy with upgraded hardware and software, what's innovative about that? Actually, are there any games that do stuff that hasn't already been done on the Eyetoy? Not being factitious here, I'm genuinely interested.
Algertman: 'Casual' is what we generally label games that are really intuitive and self explanatory (they generally only use a couple of buttons), while 'hardcore' is the label we use for games that are generally pretty complex (aka, they require pretty much all the buttons on a controller). So yeah, I consider Call of Duty a hardcore game and anyone that plays it regularly a hardcore gamer.
And even if your definition were correct, just because game x and game y are considered casual, doesn't suddenly mean their audiences are one and the same. If you think the people that play Halo are the exact same people that go and wave their arms around playing Wii Fit then I've not much to say to you.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
Actually, one of the main reasons the Wii got popular was that Nintendo went one one fucking HELL of a marketing blitz.
Never forget that Nintendo has Reggie, and for all we joke and kid around about the man, he's a marketing savant. Ever since he was brought on, Nintendo's reputation as a gaming company has been increasing steadily. Personally, I can't wait to see what happens when Nintendo develops an HD system that is cheap/easy to develop for.
Honestly, per the Star Wars Kinect game, I would LOVE it to be on rails.
A rail "shooter" where instead of shooting things, you slice the shit out of them with a lightsaber and wreck shit with force powers? That would be awesome.
Then again, I bought both Resident Evil Chronicles games, and Dead Space Extraction, so I likes me a rail shooter.
I'm still waiting on Star Wars Arcade to get a home port, so you're not alone there.
Honestly, per the Star Wars Kinect game, I would LOVE it to be on rails.
A rail "shooter" where instead of shooting things, you slice the shit out of them with a lightsaber and wreck shit with force powers? That would be awesome.
Then again, I bought both Resident Evil Chronicles games, and Dead Space Extraction, so I likes me a rail shooter.
I'm still waiting on Star Wars Arcade to get a home port, so you're not alone there.
Honestly, per the Star Wars Kinect game, I would LOVE it to be on rails.
A rail "shooter" where instead of shooting things, you slice the shit out of them with a lightsaber and wreck shit with force powers? That would be awesome.
Then again, I bought both Resident Evil Chronicles games, and Dead Space Extraction, so I likes me a rail shooter.
I'm still waiting on Star Wars Arcade to get a home port, so you're not alone there.
Oh I've noticed it and brought it up plenty (much to Sheep's annoyance),
I agree with everything you've said in your past two or three posts.
I think our last dust up was over "killer app" and when that definition is applied. Meaning, I think that MS' "killer app" for Kinect is the Wii stuff they showed earlier. Stuff to get people to buy the system. Where as I think you seemed to reserve using that label until a product begins moving due to a specific software.
That's applicable, but I disagree with that use.
I think bot Kinect and Move will do about the same. Kinect will benefit from the perception that it may be easier to get into, I think both will have the "dust off mah Kinect/Move" thing going for them in due time.
The only really bad idea I keep seeing is Sony's assumption that "core" gamers on the Wii really want games like SOCOM 4 but are just being held back by the Wii's capabilities. They do benefit from having motion and standard controlled games in one package though. MS, on the other hand, really need to ramp up the PR battle. The whole "Kinect is Dooooomed" thing seems to be pretty prevalent on the net. They need to nip this "You can't sit and play Kinect" type shit in the bud ASAP. This is a headline demographic. No one is gonna find a day and a half old article on Kotaku with an update that they actually don't know what the fuck they're talking about and oops my bad.
I also agree with the above redefinition of "hardcore", but I figured for consistencies sake, we just keep with the trend.
The PS3 will have a camera thingy...thats sits on your tv.
The 360 will have a better camera thingy...that sits on your TV.
Assuming these aren't natively stackable, I hope we see a decent market for an all-in-one from one of the peripheral manufacturers out there.
Otherwise, I forsee a large group of people, (Those with a steady paycheck, and the free time to play games) who will some kind of circa-1980's monstrosity growing out of their TV.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
I'm honestly surprised we haven't seen "Wii ready" TV's yet. All the system is, is 2 IR lights. By putting it in the TV, and spreading it to the right dimensions for said TV, you'd have a solution that was transparent. Of course, Sony's TVs would never include that option, but for them you could get a Playstation Eye / webcam pre-installed. Natal, with its motorized base, is the odd man out. (I wonder how much clearance it needs?)
Given that Child of Eden can a) be played with regular controllers and b) is, thankfully, not 360-exclusive, I don't see it selling Stupidname at all.
Okay.. well it is available on the 360 so it's not inconceivable that people will buy it for that, and I don't know how you can't see the potential for playing it with Kinect over a controller.
Given that Child of Eden can a) be played with regular controllers and b) is, thankfully, not 360-exclusive, I don't see it selling Stupidname at all.
Okay.. well it is available on the 360 so it's not inconceivable that people will buy it for that, and I don't know how you can't see the potential for playing it with Kinect over a controller.
Which is why I reckon it will help sell hardware.
I can see the potential, I just don't see it making much difference to sales.
On the subject of motion controls, for all the hurfing and durfing about copying, have we considered that the three platforms all having a motion control option might mean developers are more likely to embrace motion controls? If they can now more readily design for three platforms rather than have to split efforts, isn't that for the better?
On the subject of motion controls, for all the hurfing and durfing about copying, have we considered that the three platforms all having a motion control option might mean developers are more likely to embrace motion controls? If they can now more readily design for three platforms rather than have to split efforts, isn't that for the better?
The problem with this is that as far as Japan is concerned, they have their new developing baby known as the 3DS. So development is going to be split again unless the Western developers warms up to portable gaming, which I don't see happening very soon.
On the subject of motion controls, for all the hurfing and durfing about copying, have we considered that the three platforms all having a motion control option might mean developers are more likely to embrace motion controls? If they can now more readily design for three platforms rather than have to split efforts, isn't that for the better?
Actually I was thinking about that. The problem the Wii had is that developers, for the most part, didn't have the patience/talent to come up with something truly creative and new, and so fell back to making the same old thing with minor tweaks on the 360 and PS3, even though the Wii was selling insanely well. It was an escape route.
So now the 360 and PS3 have motion controls as well. Does this mean that developers will come up with the patience/talent necessary to truly bring new things to the table? The reason I'm doubtful is that they still have an escape route with normal controls. They don't have to use Kinect or Move at all. And it's likely many of them won't much, even if they become popular.
I really think that the only way we'll ever get some true effort put into motion controls from more than a few brave developers is if we enter a gen in which everyone is forced to use motion controls.
On the subject of motion controls, for all the hurfing and durfing about copying, have we considered that the three platforms all having a motion control option might mean developers are more likely to embrace motion controls? If they can now more readily design for three platforms rather than have to split efforts, isn't that for the better?
Nice in theory, but unlikely in practice, I suspect.
I'd still much rather the Wi''s IR pointer had been copied instead of the motion control.
I think the Live version sold a considerable amount. Couple hundred thousand.
Clearly 200k sales are all Microsoft need to be a roaring success.
On the subject of motion controls, for all the hurfing and durfing about copying, have we considered that the three platforms all having a motion control option might mean developers are more likely to embrace motion controls? If they can now more readily design for three platforms rather than have to split efforts, isn't that for the better?
Actually I was thinking about that. The problem the Wii had is that developers, for the most part, didn't have the patience/talent to come up with something truly creative and new, and so fell back to making the same old thing with minor tweaks on the 360 and PS3, even though the Wii was selling insanely well. It was an escape route.
So now the 360 and PS3 have motion controls as well. Does this mean that developers will come up with the patience/talent necessary to truly bring new things to the table? The reason I'm doubtful is that they still have an escape route with normal controls. They don't have to use Kinect or Move at all. And it's likely many of them won't much, even if they become popular.
I really think that the only way we'll ever get some true effort put into motion controls from more than a few brave developers is if we enter a gen in which everyone is forced to use motion controls.
Yeah, that's fair. Anything new will always need someone brave to take it up, which is where you could even see something original from one of the failing studios, trying a last throw of the dice. I do think it's git a better chance now than before, though.
Clearly 200k sales are all Microsoft need to be a roaring success.
For a ridiculous niche game those are great numbers.
EDIT
Google says that number may be closer to 500,000.
Sheep on
0
Dr Mario KartGames DealerAustin, TXRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
Nintendo's success this cycle has seemingly made them less paranoid. They were late to market/reveal with the Wii as well as the DS, theoretically on the grounds that their ideas could be stolen.
Nintendo is at a disadvantage when it comes to pricing in that their competitors are willing to sell hardware at a heavy loss, even ending an entire cycle at a loss. Sony could theoretically make a machine that does everything the 3DS does, and sell it for less. However, Nintendo hasnt been rushing with their R&D into 3D, and any adaptation by Sony would necessarily be rushed (see six axis)
Nintendo has been a bit notorious for not helping 3rd parties develop games. If Sony and MS help developers with the controls and maybe offer some *ahem* incentives to use them they might be better utilized. Cross platform motion control development probably introduces more problems then it'll solve though. Reassigning a button from controller A to controller B isn't quite the same as converting motion A from Move to Kinnect.
My crazy conspiracy theory is that a lot more companies will be more likely to develop for the Wii and maybe even lead with it and port to Move and Kinnect.
Dritz on
There I was, 3DS: 2621-2671-9899 (Ekera), Wii U: LostCrescendo
On the subject of motion controls, for all the hurfing and durfing about copying, have we considered that the three platforms all having a motion control option might mean developers are more likely to embrace motion controls? If they can now more readily design for three platforms rather than have to split efforts, isn't that for the better?
Actually I was thinking about that. The problem the Wii had is that developers, for the most part, didn't have the patience/talent to come up with something truly creative and new, and so fell back to making the same old thing with minor tweaks on the 360 and PS3, even though the Wii was selling insanely well. It was an escape route.
So now the 360 and PS3 have motion controls as well. Does this mean that developers will come up with the patience/talent necessary to truly bring new things to the table? The reason I'm doubtful is that they still have an escape route with normal controls. They don't have to use Kinect or Move at all. And it's likely many of them won't much, even if they become popular.
I really think that the only way we'll ever get some true effort put into motion controls from more than a few brave developers is if we enter a gen in which everyone is forced to use motion controls.
Yeah, that's fair. Anything new will always need someone brave to take it up, which is where you could even see something original from one of the failing studios, trying a last throw of the dice. I do think it's git a better chance now than before, though.
considering that the majority of developers currently only make games where you either point and shoot or main in some other fashion, I have a lot of doubt that we're going to see very many games that take motion games beyond that core premise. That might still lead to some really compelling content, but don't think we're going to see too many games where motion is anything but an accessory. I think most games that are cross developed over more than one platform that aren't casual games are also going to have the option of using a standard controller.
Nintendo's success this cycle has seemingly made them less paranoid. They were late to market/reveal with the Wii as well as the DS, theoretically on the grounds that their ideas could be stolen.
Nintendo is at a disadvantage when it comes to pricing in that their competitors are willing to sell hardware at a heavy loss, even ending an entire cycle at a loss. Sony could theoretically make a machine that does everything the 3DS does, and sell it for less. However, Nintendo hasnt been rushing with their R&D into 3D, and any adaptation by Sony would necessarily be rushed (see six axis)
I'm sure the PSP2 would have always been planned to have 3D at least since last Christmas. The technology for glasses-less 3D has been around for awhile hasn't it? One thing that'll get the PSP2 just as it did the original PSP is that I am sure they are going to have the more powerful system with less battery life.
Dritz on
There I was, 3DS: 2621-2671-9899 (Ekera), Wii U: LostCrescendo
Thinking positively, a decent motion-controlled game acroos Wii-360-PS3 could potentially sell boatloads, so some companies may try to invest something decent or create a new IP actually worth something...
I wonder why they were so ready and willing to cast aside the Sixaxis and motion controlling and yet cling to the decaying corpse of the PSP. Or did they readily believe the GO was the answer to all their problems?
Any potential PSP2 is going to go in with nearly all the cards stacked against it. From a business standpoint I'm not sure it would be a good move for Sony at all.
Posts
The suits at SCE are pretty similar in that regard but they've got so many studios under their wing that they still manage to pull out some neat and crazy shit. I kinda think Sony will do the opposite to Microsoft, start off with barely any momentum but grow it from there so that they actually end up with a decent Move install base.
I like that they're trying to get their current install base to buy into Move with 'hardcore' games like RE5, Killzone 3 and SOCOM 4 though. If I were to ever buy a Move, those are the types of games I'd buy it for. Hell, put Move support into Portal 2 and I'd probably buy that god damn thing at launch.
Shit, Microsoft has been doing that from the beginning. The original Xbox's launch lineup was pretty much planned by committee. They probably did a study to find out what the three most important genres are to american gamers. They came up with first person shooters, racing games and fighting games. Three of their big early game were Halo, Project Gotham Racing and Dead or Alive 3. They were also busy getting Rare away from Nintendo so that they could match what Nintendo does. If you study the history of the Xbox, they've always attempted to get one for one what the competition has or (imitate as closely as possible). It's smart but it's also incredibly uncreative, which is part of the reason I've never been fond of all things Xbox. Now they're doing it with the Wii. They didn't bring a whole lot of originality to the table because they've never been very original, just riding on the backs of others.
Did anyone see Iron Man 2? Microsoft is Justin Hammer. Kinect is Microsoft trying to be Tony Stark.
A rail "shooter" where instead of shooting things, you slice the shit out of them with a lightsaber and wreck shit with force powers? That would be awesome.
Then again, I bought both Resident Evil Chronicles games, and Dead Space Extraction, so I likes me a rail shooter.
Fine, you people win. I'll now start using the terms Casual and Hardcore.
Casuals already own a 360. WTF do you think Halo is? It's the most casual game ever. Might as well thrown in all those warfare based FPSs while we are at it.
Basically by internet parlance, what you just said is that soccer moms, seven year old girls, lapsed gamers, and people who generally just play Solitaire and Bejeweled all have 360s with Halo.
And yeah, everyone knows what you mean, but that's just semantics and mincing words. We know that the RPG stat crunchers are teh real hardcores. But "hardcore" is still generally understood to mean blood, swearing, drugs and whores. Please don't argue this, it already hurts enough to think about it. That's just the way the word is used on forums for purposes of easy discussion.
Yeah becuase the guy who sits around and plays MW2 90% of the time is hardcore.
That goes for Gears of War as well. Gears of War might as well be Rob Liefeld: The Game.
Ok fine. You've successfully redefined years of established parlance. Hardcores own the Wii and casuals own PS3 and 360. Tommatt meant to say all the hardcores he's talked to are buying 360s.
Now that we've defined that for the purposes of this thread can we move on?
Hardcore is those jerks who you hate and are killing the industry with their niche games.
And hell I've always been for hardcore - mainstream - 'casual'. It's significantly more useful than a false dichotomy that no one has ever agreed on since day one.
Why be a dick over it? Halo and MW2 are games that lack any real depth and are marketed accordingly for mass appeal.
It's a lot easier to hit 10th prestige on MW2 than it is to get every damn star on Mario Galaxy 2. It may take longer but there's no real difficulty involved.
This is especially true since so few games are really hard these days since devs want you to see all the content they spent so much money making.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Oh I've noticed it and brought it up plenty (much to Sheep's annoyance), I just think it's more obvious than ever right now. I also think it's a pretty bad move when you're trying to sell an optional peripheral using mostly first party software (because as third parties have shown on the Wii, they're clearly not reliable). The main reason why the Wii got popular in the first place was because it was new, not the same shit other people have done.
I still don't know how they've convinced some people that Kinect's innovative. It's an Eyetoy with upgraded hardware and software, what's innovative about that? Actually, are there any games that do stuff that hasn't already been done on the Eyetoy? Not being factitious here, I'm genuinely interested.
Algertman: 'Casual' is what we generally label games that are really intuitive and self explanatory (they generally only use a couple of buttons), while 'hardcore' is the label we use for games that are generally pretty complex (aka, they require pretty much all the buttons on a controller). So yeah, I consider Call of Duty a hardcore game and anyone that plays it regularly a hardcore gamer.
And even if your definition were correct, just because game x and game y are considered casual, doesn't suddenly mean their audiences are one and the same. If you think the people that play Halo are the exact same people that go and wave their arms around playing Wii Fit then I've not much to say to you.
Never forget that Nintendo has Reggie, and for all we joke and kid around about the man, he's a marketing savant. Ever since he was brought on, Nintendo's reputation as a gaming company has been increasing steadily. Personally, I can't wait to see what happens when Nintendo develops an HD system that is cheap/easy to develop for.
I'm still waiting on Star Wars Arcade to get a home port, so you're not alone there.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
Sin and Punishment 2 says hello. It's an on rails shooter where you can both shoot and lightsaber shit. And dodge danmaku.
Seconding this.
Plus, it's better than Starfox. Or Panzer Dragoon. Or most other on rails you can name.
I agree with everything you've said in your past two or three posts.
I think our last dust up was over "killer app" and when that definition is applied. Meaning, I think that MS' "killer app" for Kinect is the Wii stuff they showed earlier. Stuff to get people to buy the system. Where as I think you seemed to reserve using that label until a product begins moving due to a specific software.
That's applicable, but I disagree with that use.
I think bot Kinect and Move will do about the same. Kinect will benefit from the perception that it may be easier to get into, I think both will have the "dust off mah Kinect/Move" thing going for them in due time.
The only really bad idea I keep seeing is Sony's assumption that "core" gamers on the Wii really want games like SOCOM 4 but are just being held back by the Wii's capabilities. They do benefit from having motion and standard controlled games in one package though. MS, on the other hand, really need to ramp up the PR battle. The whole "Kinect is Dooooomed" thing seems to be pretty prevalent on the net. They need to nip this "You can't sit and play Kinect" type shit in the bud ASAP. This is a headline demographic. No one is gonna find a day and a half old article on Kotaku with an update that they actually don't know what the fuck they're talking about and oops my bad.
I also agree with the above redefinition of "hardcore", but I figured for consistencies sake, we just keep with the trend.
The Wii has a sensor that sits on your TV.
The PS3 will have a camera thingy...thats sits on your tv.
The 360 will have a better camera thingy...that sits on your TV.
Assuming these aren't natively stackable, I hope we see a decent market for an all-in-one from one of the peripheral manufacturers out there.
Otherwise, I forsee a large group of people, (Those with a steady paycheck, and the free time to play games) who will some kind of circa-1980's monstrosity growing out of their TV.
Still find it funny it's called a "Sensor" bar when it doesn't sense anything.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
Okay.. well it is available on the 360 so it's not inconceivable that people will buy it for that, and I don't know how you can't see the potential for playing it with Kinect over a controller.
Which is why I reckon it will help sell hardware.
I can see the potential, I just don't see it making much difference to sales.
Actually I could see Child of Eden intimidating the hell out of the soccer moms Kinect is (currently) aimed at.
Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
The problem with this is that as far as Japan is concerned, they have their new developing baby known as the 3DS. So development is going to be split again unless the Western developers warms up to portable gaming, which I don't see happening very soon.
Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
I think the Live version sold a considerable amount. Couple hundred thousand.
Actually I was thinking about that. The problem the Wii had is that developers, for the most part, didn't have the patience/talent to come up with something truly creative and new, and so fell back to making the same old thing with minor tweaks on the 360 and PS3, even though the Wii was selling insanely well. It was an escape route.
So now the 360 and PS3 have motion controls as well. Does this mean that developers will come up with the patience/talent necessary to truly bring new things to the table? The reason I'm doubtful is that they still have an escape route with normal controls. They don't have to use Kinect or Move at all. And it's likely many of them won't much, even if they become popular.
I really think that the only way we'll ever get some true effort put into motion controls from more than a few brave developers is if we enter a gen in which everyone is forced to use motion controls.
Nice in theory, but unlikely in practice, I suspect.
I'd still much rather the Wi''s IR pointer had been copied instead of the motion control.
Clearly 200k sales are all Microsoft need to be a roaring success.
Yeah, that's fair. Anything new will always need someone brave to take it up, which is where you could even see something original from one of the failing studios, trying a last throw of the dice. I do think it's git a better chance now than before, though.
For a ridiculous niche game those are great numbers.
EDIT
Google says that number may be closer to 500,000.
Nintendo is at a disadvantage when it comes to pricing in that their competitors are willing to sell hardware at a heavy loss, even ending an entire cycle at a loss. Sony could theoretically make a machine that does everything the 3DS does, and sell it for less. However, Nintendo hasnt been rushing with their R&D into 3D, and any adaptation by Sony would necessarily be rushed (see six axis)
My crazy conspiracy theory is that a lot more companies will be more likely to develop for the Wii and maybe even lead with it and port to Move and Kinnect.
considering that the majority of developers currently only make games where you either point and shoot or main in some other fashion, I have a lot of doubt that we're going to see very many games that take motion games beyond that core premise. That might still lead to some really compelling content, but don't think we're going to see too many games where motion is anything but an accessory. I think most games that are cross developed over more than one platform that aren't casual games are also going to have the option of using a standard controller.
I'm sure the PSP2 would have always been planned to have 3D at least since last Christmas. The technology for glasses-less 3D has been around for awhile hasn't it? One thing that'll get the PSP2 just as it did the original PSP is that I am sure they are going to have the more powerful system with less battery life.
Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111