Analyst says May was “stacked in favour of dramatic growth”; Nintendo decline is “remarkable”; Digital ascendancy is upon us
“We expect investors to remain spooked by the May results, as they are beginning to reinforce the notion that the video game industry is in a state of persistent secular decline.”
That’s the somewhat startling assessment of famed games analyst Michael Pachter in light of further declines in the US market in both April and May.
“The May line-up was indeed stacked in favour of dramatic growth, but despite May’s easy percentage and dollar comparisons and long-anticipated debuts for a handful of games, it became clear that several of May’s games performed well below expectations as the month progressed,” he stated in his official reaction.
In particular, Pachter singled out Nintendo for the fact that software sales continue to dwindle despite its growing install base.
“Wii software sales were down 29 per cent year-over-year and DS software sales were down 13 per cent, while PS3 software sales were up 58 per cent and Xbox 360 software sales were up 29 per cent,” he added.
“We think this is remarkable, given growth in the Wii hardware installed base of 44 per cent and growth in the DS installed base of 33 per cent over the last 12 months. In our view, this indicates that Nintendo’s customers either are not finding enough software to satisfy their needs, or need less software than the typical Sony or Microsoft customer.”
That’s not to say that Nintendo was the only offender. Pachter also laments the fact that a number of key titles – Alan Wake, Prince of Persia, Blur, Shrek, Lost Planet 2, Iron Man 2 and Skate 3 all sold fewer than 200,000 units.
The conclusion Pachter draws from the continued slump in the US market is a dark one. He thinks that the games industry isn’t just in the downward part of the current cycle – he reckons it’s facing a permanent decline.
“We expect investors to remain spooked by the May results, as they are beginning to reinforce the notion that the video game industry is in a state of persistent secular decline,” he warns. “We think it is inevitable that there will be a shift in delivery of video games away from packaged products and toward digital downloads, but we don’t expect the shift to manifest itself in a material way in 2010.
“Rather, we believe that the publishers and developers of games have created more robust multiplayer content in recent years that has resulted in core gamers playing the same games for much longer, on average, than they did in the past, leading to lower sales of new games.
“We expect the publishers to monetise the value created by online play, led by Activision. We continue to expect Activision to find a way to monetize the 1.75bn hours of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 online play on the Xbox 360 in the first five months following the game’s release.
“We expect investors to stay on the sidelines until they see evidence of a sustainable rebound in sales. The modest rebound in May is likely to be insufficient to convince anyone of sustainability, and we do not expect share prices to begin to rebound until later this summer.
“The central thesis behind investment malaise is that the packaged goods business is in a state of decline, and that packaged products will continue to compete with alternative interactive entertainment experiences such as Facebook games and iPhone games.”
Seriously?
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED FACEBOOK GAMING IS THE ONLY FUTURE!
That is barely even an exaggeration.
Most of those games aren't even key titles even if you stretch the word "key."
Couscous on
0
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
Oh no! People are starting to figure out that movie licensed games suck! It's the end of the world!
Oh no! People are starting to figure out that movie licensed games suck! It's the end of the world!
Hey Forgotten sands was good!
It was a game based on a movie based on a game. It doesn't really count. (unless you are talking about Street Fighter: The Movie: The Game, which counts due to terribleness)
The part I laughed about was where he predicted Activision will 'monetize' it's non-MMO multiplayer games so that those mean ol' gamers can't get away with not buying new games every month.
Not that everyone and their mother hasn't already made the statement 'I bet Activision will...' along those lines already, while rolling their eyes, but actually doing so would be so monumentally stupid I am at a loss for words. I mean, imagine MW2 did just what Patcher thinks they will. Hmm, MW2 or BC2? BC2 has better multiplayer, MW2 is charging me a sub fee.......what to choose?
The part I laughed about was where he predicted Activision will 'monetize' it's non-MMO multiplayer games so that those mean ol' gamers can't get away with not buying new games every month.
Not that everyone and their mother hasn't already made the statement 'I bet Activision will...' along those lines already, while rolling their eyes, but actually doing so would be so monumentally stupid I am at a loss for words. I mean, imagine MW2 did just what Patcher thinks they will. Hmm, MW2 or BC2? BC2 has better multiplayer, MW2 is charging me a sub fee.......what to choose?
It's Pachter. He's either always wrong or gives the most obvious predictions ever. To be fair, I'm not sure which of those two that Activision thing falls under. I know Kotick would love nothing more than to monitize MW2. I'm just not sure if he is *that* stupid.
Alan Wake-A horror game not selling gangbusters? Who would have thought?
Prince of Persia-a cash-in on a disappointment of a move
Blur-Don't know. Don't really know much about it.
Shrek-What.
Lost Planet 2-First one was blah, second one is blah too, and it isn't big enough to have the sequel sell based on numbers for the first game alone.
Iron Man 2-See Shrek.
Skate 3-See Skate 1 and Skate 2. They didn't sell that much better than Skate 3.
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED FACEBOOK GAMING IS THE ONLY FUTURE!
That is barely even an exaggeration.
Most of those games aren't even key titles even if you stretch the word "key."
We are in the year 2010. The first console of this generation came out in 2005. Since the NES, in every cycle before this one we'd already know about the next generation of consoles. Meanwhile Sony and Microsoft seem to be relying on the motion market to extend the life of their consoles; a strategy that might fail miserably.
The 360 and PS3 each had releases in May that failed. Failures that if done on the Wii would be explained as "hardcore" doesn't sale on the userbase. The fact is that these games were released in May during the 5th year of a generation that has seen many similar games released; except maybe Alan Wake. This generation is acting its age.
But thanks for the sky is falling tactic Pachter. Did anything else even come out for the Wii that month?
This whole delay feels like a conspiracy to keep E3 positive.
I wonder... will the existence of the glasses-free 3DS make the buying public less likely to put up with 3D glasses? "Hey, I don't need glasses for this thing, why do I need them for the TV? I'm sure they'll figure out how to do it for the TV soon, I'll just wait till then." And let's face it, EVERYONE will soon learn that glasses aren't required, I'm sure Nintendo and the media will hype it up.
Maybe that's why Sony execs sound slightly panicked whenever the 3D capabilities of the 3DS are brought up.
This is totally what it is. That thing that Sony said crying about Nintendo slandering them was purely a "they are going to kill our 3D TV sales!" statement. You'll notice he says he wants to work with Nintendo to promote 3D, but *only* if they shut up about the no glasses thing. This is Sony trying to sell their expensive TVs. The PS3 3D stuff is the same thing - I bet you if Sony did not manufacture the TVs themselves they wouldn't have even bothered.
(for similar examples, see: DVD bundled with PS2, Bluray bundled with PS3)
This is all true, and it's really quite fucking laughable on the part of Sony. Nintendo doesn't need Sony's help in shit. In fact, Nintendo's doing exactly what they need to do: separate themselves as much as possible from the silly goosery of 3D glasses and $6k televisions. Nintendo should be doing everything they can to make the 3DS look like both the technologically superior and inexpensive alternative to overpriced 3D, which seems to me that they're actually doing.
In other words... Sony, you silly geese: Nintendo doesn't need to sell televisions or glasses, they've got a handheld market to dominate.
The part I laughed about was where he predicted Activision will 'monetize' it's non-MMO multiplayer games so that those mean ol' gamers can't get away with not buying new games every month.
They already do this. It's called selling Map Packs.
I wonder... will the existence of the glasses-free 3DS make the buying public less likely to put up with 3D glasses? "Hey, I don't need glasses for this thing, why do I need them for the TV? I'm sure they'll figure out how to do it for the TV soon, I'll just wait till then." And let's face it, EVERYONE will soon learn that glasses aren't required, I'm sure Nintendo and the media will hype it up.
Maybe that's why Sony execs sound slightly panicked whenever the 3D capabilities of the 3DS are brought up.
This is totally what it is. That thing that Sony said crying about Nintendo slandering them was purely a "they are going to kill our 3D TV sales!" statement. You'll notice he says he wants to work with Nintendo to promote 3D, but *only* if they shut up about the no glasses thing. This is Sony trying to sell their expensive TVs. The PS3 3D stuff is the same thing - I bet you if Sony did not manufacture the TVs themselves they wouldn't have even bothered.
(for similar examples, see: DVD bundled with PS2, Bluray bundled with PS3)
Sony is pretty infamous for their internal bickering between divisions, so why would Shuhei Yoshida (who isn't even involved with SCE's hardware, let alone Sony Corps) give a crap about Sony Corps' tv sales? The guy is the head of SCE Worldwide studios (SCE's game developers, himself being a former game producer, not a PR guy like Tretton or Hirai) and genuinely seems to come off as an absurdly nice person. I think you're trying to connect dots that seem pretty tenuous at very best.
The only one which could be called close to 'Key' was Alan Wake, and it suffered from only OK reviews.
o_O Lost Planet 1 was a pretty bloody big game, while Prince of Persia is a pretty popular franchise which tied into a movie release. How is Alan Wake more of a 'key' title than them?
As for Blur and Split/Second, does anyone remember how well the last NFS did in the US? I have to wonder if the racing market isn't dead in the US, outside of relatively casual stuff like Mario Kart anyway. I'd bet both (alongside Modnation Racers) did far better in Europe.
I wonder... will the existence of the glasses-free 3DS make the buying public less likely to put up with 3D glasses? "Hey, I don't need glasses for this thing, why do I need them for the TV? I'm sure they'll figure out how to do it for the TV soon, I'll just wait till then." And let's face it, EVERYONE will soon learn that glasses aren't required, I'm sure Nintendo and the media will hype it up.
Maybe that's why Sony execs sound slightly panicked whenever the 3D capabilities of the 3DS are brought up.
This is totally what it is. That thing that Sony said crying about Nintendo slandering them was purely a "they are going to kill our 3D TV sales!" statement. You'll notice he says he wants to work with Nintendo to promote 3D, but *only* if they shut up about the no glasses thing. This is Sony trying to sell their expensive TVs. The PS3 3D stuff is the same thing - I bet you if Sony did not manufacture the TVs themselves they wouldn't have even bothered.
(for similar examples, see: DVD bundled with PS2, Bluray bundled with PS3)
Sony is pretty infamous for their internal bickering between divisions, so why would Shuhei Yoshida (who isn't even involved with SCE's hardware, let alone Sony Corps) give a crap about Sony Corps' tv sales? The guy is the head of SCE Worldwide studios (SCE's game developers, himself being a former game producer, not a PR guy like Tretton or Hirai) and genuinely seems to come off as an absurdly nice person. I think you're trying to connect dots that seem pretty tenuous at very best.
Why would one part of Sony not want to see the rest of Sony fail? What kind of question is that?
Also, the PS3 3D stuff is contingent on Sony's electronics division selling 3D TVs. If no one is buying 3D TVs, they are completely wasting their time (and development dollars) on incorporating 3D into PS3 games.
Report from Ipsos MediaCT says pre-owned market is acting as safeguard for traditional retail
New research claims that consumers consider physical product to be more important in games than in newspapers, films or music.
A survey of over 1,000 people by research firm Ipsos MediaCT found that 64 per cent preferred physical discs for their games over digital copies.
Newspapers followed closely with 63 per cent opting for hard copies. Conversely music and film were considerably lower, with a respective 45 and 51 per cent shunning digital.
“I believe the preference for physical discs amongst next gen gamers reflects the potential value they derive from the pre-owned market, which is holding up the preference for physical – this is unlike the music and film markets,” said Ipsos MediaCT director Ian Bramley.
“Physical games discs have a long and well-established history, which is a deep mindset to change – particularly when gamers build a physical collection as they fear losing digital versions. And in-store browsing is also important to buyers.”
I'm pretty sure the tech has existed, it's just not super practical on a large scale (bad viewing angles, expensive, etc). For what Nintendo is doing, it works though.
I can't read it because Kotaku is blocked here, so all I have to go on is their terrible RSS feed that doesn't post the whole story.
It's an article listing corporate "apologies" for each of the 3 console makers (broken wrist straps, RROD warranty extension, PSP-1000's broken square button) and finishing up with Apple's recent iPhone 4 "apology." Their choice for Nintendo's is weird since the broken wrist strap complaints mainly turned out to be from people who played the Wii without their straps, tossed the remote into the TV, and then cut/broke the straps afterwards to try and shift the blame to Nintendo. They would have probably been better with the broken DS Lite shoulder button thing, since even DSi see,s to suffer from that issue to some degree still, but they're not journalists, they're tabloid article writers, so they just put up whatever they could as quick as they could.
I'm pretty sure the tech has existed, it's just not super practical on a large scale (bad viewing angles, expensive, etc). For what Nintendo is doing, it works though.
I can't read it because Kotaku is blocked here, so all I have to go on is their terrible RSS feed that doesn't post the whole story.
It's an article listing corporate "apologies" for each of the 3 console makers (broken wrist straps, RROD warranty extension, PSP-1000's broken square button) and finishing up with Apple's recent iPhone 4 "apology." Their choice for Nintendo's is weird since the broken wrist strap complaints mainly turned out to be from people who played the Wii without their straps, tossed the remote into the TV, and then cut/broke the straps afterwards to try and shift the blame to Nintendo. They would have probably been better with the broken DS Lite shoulder button thing, since even DSi see,s to suffer from that issue to some degree still, but they're not journalists, they're tabloid article writers, so they just put up whatever they could as quick as they could.
I wonder... will the existence of the glasses-free 3DS make the buying public less likely to put up with 3D glasses? "Hey, I don't need glasses for this thing, why do I need them for the TV? I'm sure they'll figure out how to do it for the TV soon, I'll just wait till then." And let's face it, EVERYONE will soon learn that glasses aren't required, I'm sure Nintendo and the media will hype it up.
Maybe that's why Sony execs sound slightly panicked whenever the 3D capabilities of the 3DS are brought up.
This is totally what it is. That thing that Sony said crying about Nintendo slandering them was purely a "they are going to kill our 3D TV sales!" statement. You'll notice he says he wants to work with Nintendo to promote 3D, but *only* if they shut up about the no glasses thing. This is Sony trying to sell their expensive TVs. The PS3 3D stuff is the same thing - I bet you if Sony did not manufacture the TVs themselves they wouldn't have even bothered.
(for similar examples, see: DVD bundled with PS2, Bluray bundled with PS3)
Sony is pretty infamous for their internal bickering between divisions, so why would Shuhei Yoshida (who isn't even involved with SCE's hardware, let alone Sony Corps) give a crap about Sony Corps' tv sales? The guy is the head of SCE Worldwide studios (SCE's game developers, himself being a former game producer, not a PR guy like Tretton or Hirai) and genuinely seems to come off as an absurdly nice person. I think you're trying to connect dots that seem pretty tenuous at very best.
Why would one part of Sony not want to see the rest of Sony fail? What kind of question is that?
Also, the PS3 3D stuff is contingent on Sony's electronics division selling 3D TVs. If no one is buying 3D TVs, they are completely wasting their time (and development dollars) on incorporating 3D into PS3 games.
Exactly. Anyone who's seen the Sony E3 keynote should know that Sony is banking a lot on 3D at the moment.
And while it may not be a significant factor, there is some potential for the 3DS to take away from Sony's 3D marketshare. Admittedly, the only example I can come up with on this would be the dude who has kids and wants them to be able to watch 3D movies. If the 3DS ends up being $200 as many have speculated, I can see that guy looking at the $150 glasses for a 3D tv and thinking to himself "Hey, for $50 more I can get a handheld that my kid can take on the road(with 3D) and play games on," let alone taking into account the $6k up front cost for the tv.
Some thoughts on 3D on PS3, reposted from savygamer.
I hope you can all see what 3D on the PS3 is for
It is purely, purely, to sell Sony’s expensive 3DTVs.
That’s what Sony does, it’s their DNA. They did it with the Compact Disc with the Playstation, DVD with the PS2, HD and just about managed Blu Ray with the PS3.
A tiny number of people will benefit from the 3DTV stuff. There will always be early adopters, and this is no exception, but I certainly don’t think 3DTV will be as popular as fast as Sony seem to want it to be.
The problem here is that they haven’t even finished servicing the technology they sold on the back of their games division before moving on to the next one. I can count the number of 1080p capable PS3 games that I own on one hand. They took a lot of money from their customers in return for HDTVs, but their console barely manages to use them to their full extent. Yet they have the cheek to tell you that you should buy a new 3DTV now, and a pair of their, proprietary, googles to experience the best experience of their gaming experience.
I bet they are terrified of the 3DS.
I say 3D is bollocks, for the time being at least. I think Sony are impatient, and they should wait until they can put out a console that is powerful enough to support 3D and 1080p resolutions without hampering game performance, because the PS3 certainly isn’t.
The part I laughed about was where he predicted Activision will 'monetize' it's non-MMO multiplayer games so that those mean ol' gamers can't get away with not buying new games every month.
They already do this. It's called selling Map Packs.
Well, Patcher (and a few other folks admittedly) think they are actually going to go to a subscription model. Map packs costing money is kind of dumb, but no where near as dumb as a sub model. And even then they've already caused tons of bitching, and driven quite a few people away to BC2. Anecdotal evidence of course, but everyone I personally know who were into MW2 did just that.
Sony wasn't thrilled about Nintendo's E3 2010 press conference where it continually reiterated its "no more glasses" messaging for the 3DS.
During an interview with IGN, president of Sony's Worldwide Studios Shuhei Yoshida responded by saying Nintendo's vision for 3D gaming is similar to theirs and that it shouldn't focus on whether or not glasses are worn.
"I have hope that they have a broader perspective with 3D," Yoshida said. "When you listen to what they are saying about the effect of 3D perspective to the games, they are saying the same message we are, but they don't have to bash some small part of what the other company is doing."
Yoshida later said the industry should advocate 3D development, and that Sony would like to work alongside Nintendo in promoting the new technology.
"I think as an industry we should preach this new perspective, from a very large cinema screen to a small portable, because that helps advancing the games and the game industry," he said. "We'd like to work together to promote 3D."
At the time, Yoshida admitted he hadn't actually played the 3DS yet, but said the glasses technology is improving all the time and that of course they'll be required for movie-like experiences.
"If you really want a big theater experience, of course you have to wear glasses," he said. "With the latest technology, the glasses are light and you kind of forget you're wearing them after awhile."
Bolded for emphasis. And quite frankly, I find both parts rubbish. Why should Nintendo give a good goddamn about propagating the 3D market as a whole? Nintendo's mission as a company should be to do everything in their power to push their product on the market. Nothing more, nothing less. And quite frankly, that's really what Yoshida is trying to do here as well. If you honestly think that Yoshida wants to push 3D simply for the betterment of mankind or the industry as a whole, well, you're a silly goose. I mean, notice how he continually says that Sony's vision and Nintendo's vision for 3D is similar when it's really, really not similar at all. That's Yoshida trying to downplay the obvious differences between the 2. And then he ends by subtly trying to differentiate Sony from the 3DS in a positive way: by pointing out in a roundabout way that only Sony can bring the big movie theater experience in 3D.
Yoshida is a businessman, and his words should be taken in that context.
I say 3D is bollocks, for the time being at least.
Same dude.
At the time, Yoshida admitted he hadn't actually played the 3DS yet, but said the glasses technology is improving all the time and that of course they'll be required for movie-like experiences.
Pffft. Not when you have to wear the glasses over or under your existing glasses.
Not to mention that Stringer's been trying to get the various Sony divisions to play better with each other, and in an interview with Wired he said he's betting big on 3D. There's a company-wide push for this, no doubt.
The more I think about it, the more I think it's possible that Sony's grand plan for 3D in all their devices to get undone by Nintendo's wee handheld.
I will probably end up buying the 3DS day one, fuck around with the 3D for an hour or so, then turn it all the way down and never move the switch again unless I need 3D to solve a puzzle or some such.
I will probably end up buying the 3DS day one, fuck around with the 3D for an hour or so, then turn it all the way down and never move the switch again unless I need 3D to solve a puzzle or some such.
This new 3D has been junk so far.
Please. You will be taking pictures of your penis for several days.
I will probably end up buying the 3DS day one, fuck around with the 3D for an hour or so, then turn it all the way down and never move the switch again unless I need 3D to solve a puzzle or some such.
This new 3D has been junk so far.
I might be like that myself. It depends on a few things, namely how my own not-terribly-great vision handles it.
I will probably end up buying the 3DS day one, fuck around with the 3D for an hour or so, then turn it all the way down and never move the switch again unless I need 3D to solve a puzzle or some such.
This new 3D has been junk so far.
Please. You will be taking pictures of your penis for several days.
Hardly.
I schedule 5:40am to 6:07am every day for such a purpose.
I dunno. If Sony is going to push 3D, I think they might as well use the PS3 to help. It's a pretty easy thing to add to games since it can be put in as an option at the engine level. No need for new assets, etc. And it doesn't really cost them anything as far as selling to the majority that don't have a 3D TV.
It's not like the situation with Blu-Ray where they passed up an opportunity to basically knock MS out of the industry and instead had to lose billions trying to sell a $600 console.
I just dont' think that TV manufacturers are going to have any luck selling 3D TVs for higher margins and doubt that 3D will sell all that many PS3s either. But it's mosty harmless.
lowlylowlycook on
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I will probably end up buying the 3DS day one, fuck around with the 3D for an hour or so, then turn it all the way down and never move the switch again unless I need 3D to solve a puzzle or some such.
This new 3D has been junk so far.
And the bolded is all Nintendo really cares about. Well, that and selling software. Which is why they've got such an awesome 3rd party lineup. If Nintendo was only banking on the 3D part of it, they wouldn't have near the quality of games they do, and would've already secured an actual plan for 3D movies on it. The gimmick is there and functional and cool, but it's not all Nintendo's got going on.
And this is why Sony should be and is afraid of the 3DS.
Unless Sony forces or provides very strong incentive to incorporate 3d into a game I don't see a lot of devs doing it.
It's a massive resource hog and would necessitate making games that look about on par with 360/PS3 launch titles (or worse), or making a game with two different sets of art assets (not going to happen). Some of the hands on reports from people playing 3d games at E3 confirm this.
Our current consoles can't even run most games in true HD resolutions. There's no way they can incorporate a tech that would double the number of frames they need to render without a significant drop in quality of visuals.
Unless Sony forces or provides very strong incentive to incorporate 3d into a game I don't see a lot of devs doing it.
It's a massive resource hog and would necessitate making games that look about on par with 360/PS3 launch titles (or worse), or making a game with two different sets of art assets (not going to happen). Some of the hands on reports from people playing 3d games at E3 confirm this.
Our current consoles can't even run most games in true HD resolutions. There's no way they can incorporate a tech that would double the number of frames they need to render without a significant drop in quality of visuals.
That is what next gen is for. Of course, listening to some analysts, there won't be a next gen until 2015.
I dunno. If Sony is going to push 3D, I think they might as well use the PS3 to help. It's a pretty easy thing to add to games since it can be put in as an option at the engine level. No need for new assets, etc.
Actually with the extra processing required, they could very much need different assets, or more optimized ones. I thought that's what everyone at E3 disliked about it, it was the same games only in a noticeably lower quality (FPS, effects, etc.).
You'd have to be an idiot to bet on 3D TV being big. Worse even, you'd have to be crazy.
HDTV/Blu-Ray adoption isn't even that high yet. Sony are almost literally insane.
Marketing people looking at ticket sales for 3D movies might disagree.
The idea Sony is the driving force behind the 3D menace is ridiculous when practically every electronics manufacturer or movie studio is pushing some 3D bullshit right now.
All those companies saw Cameron and Fox rolling in piles of Avatar cash and thought "the schlubs seem to be into this 3D crap let's try to force feed them some more".
Basically if you bought a ticket to Avatar it's your fault this is happening right now.
Unless Sony forces or provides very strong incentive to incorporate 3d into a game I don't see a lot of devs doing it.
It's a massive resource hog and would necessitate making games that look about on par with 360/PS3 launch titles (or worse), or making a game with two different sets of art assets (not going to happen). Some of the hands on reports from people playing 3d games at E3 confirm this.
Our current consoles can't even run most games in true HD resolutions. There's no way they can incorporate a tech that would double the number of frames they need to render without a significant drop in quality of visuals.
But if they do that, then they can port it to the Wii (just without the 3D part), which means there will be more people to buy their games, which means more revenue. :P
But in all seriousness, I see the same difficulties, simply because of the "significant drop in quality of visuals". Developers just don't want to do that for some reason. If any of you saw this thread on NeoGAF, there are some choice quotes in there that would make your head spin regarding that.
Posts
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED FACEBOOK GAMING IS THE ONLY FUTURE!
That is barely even an exaggeration.
Most of those games aren't even key titles even if you stretch the word "key."
May 2010 will be known as the start of the second video game crash!
Sell all your Nintendo stock, the fad is finally over!
Hey Forgotten sands was good!
It was a game based on a movie based on a game. It doesn't really count. (unless you are talking about Street Fighter: The Movie: The Game, which counts due to terribleness)
Not that everyone and their mother hasn't already made the statement 'I bet Activision will...' along those lines already, while rolling their eyes, but actually doing so would be so monumentally stupid I am at a loss for words. I mean, imagine MW2 did just what Patcher thinks they will. Hmm, MW2 or BC2? BC2 has better multiplayer, MW2 is charging me a sub fee.......what to choose?
It's Pachter. He's either always wrong or gives the most obvious predictions ever. To be fair, I'm not sure which of those two that Activision thing falls under. I know Kotick would love nothing more than to monitize MW2. I'm just not sure if he is *that* stupid.
Nintendo didn't create the tech, so they couldn't patent it if they wanted to.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
Prince of Persia-a cash-in on a disappointment of a move
Blur-Don't know. Don't really know much about it.
Shrek-What.
Lost Planet 2-First one was blah, second one is blah too, and it isn't big enough to have the sequel sell based on numbers for the first game alone.
Iron Man 2-See Shrek.
Skate 3-See Skate 1 and Skate 2. They didn't sell that much better than Skate 3.
We are in the year 2010. The first console of this generation came out in 2005. Since the NES, in every cycle before this one we'd already know about the next generation of consoles. Meanwhile Sony and Microsoft seem to be relying on the motion market to extend the life of their consoles; a strategy that might fail miserably.
The 360 and PS3 each had releases in May that failed. Failures that if done on the Wii would be explained as "hardcore" doesn't sale on the userbase. The fact is that these games were released in May during the 5th year of a generation that has seen many similar games released; except maybe Alan Wake. This generation is acting its age.
But thanks for the sky is falling tactic Pachter. Did anything else even come out for the Wii that month?
This whole delay feels like a conspiracy to keep E3 positive.
This is all true, and it's really quite fucking laughable on the part of Sony. Nintendo doesn't need Sony's help in shit. In fact, Nintendo's doing exactly what they need to do: separate themselves as much as possible from the silly goosery of 3D glasses and $6k televisions. Nintendo should be doing everything they can to make the 3DS look like both the technologically superior and inexpensive alternative to overpriced 3D, which seems to me that they're actually doing.
In other words... Sony, you silly geese: Nintendo doesn't need to sell televisions or glasses, they've got a handheld market to dominate.
I liked when they did that with Netflix streaming to the Xbox. That was humourous.
They already do this. It's called selling Map Packs.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
Sony is pretty infamous for their internal bickering between divisions, so why would Shuhei Yoshida (who isn't even involved with SCE's hardware, let alone Sony Corps) give a crap about Sony Corps' tv sales? The guy is the head of SCE Worldwide studios (SCE's game developers, himself being a former game producer, not a PR guy like Tretton or Hirai) and genuinely seems to come off as an absurdly nice person. I think you're trying to connect dots that seem pretty tenuous at very best.
o_O Lost Planet 1 was a pretty bloody big game, while Prince of Persia is a pretty popular franchise which tied into a movie release. How is Alan Wake more of a 'key' title than them?
As for Blur and Split/Second, does anyone remember how well the last NFS did in the US? I have to wonder if the racing market isn't dead in the US, outside of relatively casual stuff like Mario Kart anyway. I'd bet both (alongside Modnation Racers) did far better in Europe.
Why would one part of Sony not want to see the rest of Sony fail? What kind of question is that?
Also, the PS3 3D stuff is contingent on Sony's electronics division selling 3D TVs. If no one is buying 3D TVs, they are completely wasting their time (and development dollars) on incorporating 3D into PS3 games.
It's an article listing corporate "apologies" for each of the 3 console makers (broken wrist straps, RROD warranty extension, PSP-1000's broken square button) and finishing up with Apple's recent iPhone 4 "apology." Their choice for Nintendo's is weird since the broken wrist strap complaints mainly turned out to be from people who played the Wii without their straps, tossed the remote into the TV, and then cut/broke the straps afterwards to try and shift the blame to Nintendo. They would have probably been better with the broken DS Lite shoulder button thing, since even DSi see,s to suffer from that issue to some degree still, but they're not journalists, they're tabloid article writers, so they just put up whatever they could as quick as they could.
'lolkotaku' is quicker and more succinct.
Exactly. Anyone who's seen the Sony E3 keynote should know that Sony is banking a lot on 3D at the moment.
And while it may not be a significant factor, there is some potential for the 3DS to take away from Sony's 3D marketshare. Admittedly, the only example I can come up with on this would be the dude who has kids and wants them to be able to watch 3D movies. If the 3DS ends up being $200 as many have speculated, I can see that guy looking at the $150 glasses for a 3D tv and thinking to himself "Hey, for $50 more I can get a handheld that my kid can take on the road(with 3D) and play games on," let alone taking into account the $6k up front cost for the tv.
I hope you can all see what 3D on the PS3 is for
It is purely, purely, to sell Sony’s expensive 3DTVs.
That’s what Sony does, it’s their DNA. They did it with the Compact Disc with the Playstation, DVD with the PS2, HD and just about managed Blu Ray with the PS3.
A tiny number of people will benefit from the 3DTV stuff. There will always be early adopters, and this is no exception, but I certainly don’t think 3DTV will be as popular as fast as Sony seem to want it to be.
The problem here is that they haven’t even finished servicing the technology they sold on the back of their games division before moving on to the next one. I can count the number of 1080p capable PS3 games that I own on one hand. They took a lot of money from their customers in return for HDTVs, but their console barely manages to use them to their full extent. Yet they have the cheek to tell you that you should buy a new 3DTV now, and a pair of their, proprietary, googles to experience the best experience of their gaming experience.
I bet they are terrified of the 3DS.
I say 3D is bollocks, for the time being at least. I think Sony are impatient, and they should wait until they can put out a console that is powerful enough to support 3D and 1080p resolutions without hampering game performance, because the PS3 certainly isn’t.
Well, Patcher (and a few other folks admittedly) think they are actually going to go to a subscription model. Map packs costing money is kind of dumb, but no where near as dumb as a sub model. And even then they've already caused tons of bitching, and driven quite a few people away to BC2. Anecdotal evidence of course, but everyone I personally know who were into MW2 did just that.
Bolded for emphasis. And quite frankly, I find both parts rubbish. Why should Nintendo give a good goddamn about propagating the 3D market as a whole? Nintendo's mission as a company should be to do everything in their power to push their product on the market. Nothing more, nothing less. And quite frankly, that's really what Yoshida is trying to do here as well. If you honestly think that Yoshida wants to push 3D simply for the betterment of mankind or the industry as a whole, well, you're a silly goose. I mean, notice how he continually says that Sony's vision and Nintendo's vision for 3D is similar when it's really, really not similar at all. That's Yoshida trying to downplay the obvious differences between the 2. And then he ends by subtly trying to differentiate Sony from the 3DS in a positive way: by pointing out in a roundabout way that only Sony can bring the big movie theater experience in 3D.
Yoshida is a businessman, and his words should be taken in that context.
Same dude.
Pffft. Not when you have to wear the glasses over or under your existing glasses.
Fuck
that
shit.
The more I think about it, the more I think it's possible that Sony's grand plan for 3D in all their devices to get undone by Nintendo's wee handheld.
This new 3D has been junk so far.
Please. You will be taking pictures of your penis for several days.
I might be like that myself. It depends on a few things, namely how my own not-terribly-great vision handles it.
Hardly.
I schedule 5:40am to 6:07am every day for such a purpose.
It's not like the situation with Blu-Ray where they passed up an opportunity to basically knock MS out of the industry and instead had to lose billions trying to sell a $600 console.
I just dont' think that TV manufacturers are going to have any luck selling 3D TVs for higher margins and doubt that 3D will sell all that many PS3s either. But it's mosty harmless.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
And the bolded is all Nintendo really cares about. Well, that and selling software. Which is why they've got such an awesome 3rd party lineup. If Nintendo was only banking on the 3D part of it, they wouldn't have near the quality of games they do, and would've already secured an actual plan for 3D movies on it. The gimmick is there and functional and cool, but it's not all Nintendo's got going on.
And this is why Sony should be and is afraid of the 3DS.
HDTV/Blu-Ray adoption isn't even that high yet. Sony are almost literally insane.
It's a massive resource hog and would necessitate making games that look about on par with 360/PS3 launch titles (or worse), or making a game with two different sets of art assets (not going to happen). Some of the hands on reports from people playing 3d games at E3 confirm this.
Our current consoles can't even run most games in true HD resolutions. There's no way they can incorporate a tech that would double the number of frames they need to render without a significant drop in quality of visuals.
Picture Me Rollin'
That is what next gen is for. Of course, listening to some analysts, there won't be a next gen until 2015.
Marketing people looking at ticket sales for 3D movies might disagree.
The idea Sony is the driving force behind the 3D menace is ridiculous when practically every electronics manufacturer or movie studio is pushing some 3D bullshit right now.
All those companies saw Cameron and Fox rolling in piles of Avatar cash and thought "the schlubs seem to be into this 3D crap let's try to force feed them some more".
Basically if you bought a ticket to Avatar it's your fault this is happening right now.
A movie is about $15 or $20 though. A far cry from a few grand.
But if they do that, then they can port it to the Wii (just without the 3D part), which means there will be more people to buy their games, which means more revenue. :P
But in all seriousness, I see the same difficulties, simply because of the "significant drop in quality of visuals". Developers just don't want to do that for some reason. If any of you saw this thread on NeoGAF, there are some choice quotes in there that would make your head spin regarding that.
I WILL NOT BE DOING 3DS FOR NWC THREAD. SOMEONE ELSE WILL HAVE TO TAKE OVER.
Spoiler contains Friend Codes. Won't you be my friend?
More Friend Codes!
Mario Kart Wii: 3136-6982-0286 Tetris Party: 2364 1569 4310
Guitar Hero: Metallica: 1032 7229 7191
TATSUNOKO VS CAPCOM: 1935-2070-9123
Nintendo DS:
Worms: Open Warfare 2: 1418-7870-1606 Space Bust-a-Move: 017398 403043
Scribblenauts: 1290-7509-5558