The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Wait, Sony did the whole mainstream thing like, ten years ago and is one of the reasons why video games have million dollar budgets and billion dollar franchises. So why is Nintendo catching shit for doing it now?
Beacause if you listen to Miyamoto's speach at the GDC, he states he is spefically designing games for people who don't care about games (his wife). Sony never attempted to market games at people who don't get games, they have always tried to attract new gamers through thier the games own merits.
"Sony" doesn't even make games. They made a console, and they advertised that console to people who didn't play video games. Now shut up.
Wait, Sony did the whole mainstream thing like, ten years ago and is one of the reasons why video games have million dollar budgets and billion dollar franchises. So why is Nintendo catching shit for doing it now?
Beacause if you listen to Miyamoto's speach at the GDC, he states he is spefically designing games for people who don't care about games (his wife). Sony never attempted to market games at people who don't get games, they have always tried to attract new gamers through thier the games own merits.
"Sony" doesn't even make games. They made a console, and they advertised that console to people who didn't play video games. Now shut up.
Sony owns a variety of companies that produce games which run on the PlayStation. There is a such thing as a Sony first-party game.
You fucking ass.
EDIT: Cite where Sony's marketing was targeted at non-gamers. Because I have never, ever seen an ad by Sony directed at people who don't give a shit about video games.
No. Sony attempted to get more people into gaming. That widens the market and makes the medium more accessible. That's good.
Nintendo is trying to get people who don't care and will never care about gaming to buy games. That shifts the market focus over to people who don't give a shit about games, which drops the overall quality; why do a good job when people will pay for shit?
1) You really aren't qualified to make the emboldened statement since, you know, you can't see into the future.
2) Can you please explain how "getting more people into gaming" and "trying to get people who don't care about gaming" are different? Isn't that the entire point of any and all marketing? So Nintendo is taking that concept a step further and making simple games to hook people into gaming. Are they saying to all developers for the Wii, "You have to make schlock so that we can get more money,"? No, they aren't.
3) Who are you to dictate that every person Nintendo reaches with this new strategy isn't interested in gaming? Not to mention that if "they will never care about games", Nintendo is (apparently) doomed to failure anyway, so you don't have anything to worry about.
4) Finally, why do a good job in that case? Because there are guys like me and you out there in the industry right fucking now, looking at a half-finished game and saying that it is not enough. There will always be developers willing to take the time and effort to put together something amazing.
Shorty on
0
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
Wait, Sony did the whole mainstream thing like, ten years ago and is one of the reasons why video games have million dollar budgets and billion dollar franchises. So why is Nintendo catching shit for doing it now?
Beacause if you listen to Miyamoto's speach at the GDC, he states he is spefically designing games for people who don't care about games (his wife). Sony never attempted to market games at people who don't get games, they have always tried to attract new gamers through thier the games own merits.
"Sony" doesn't even make games. They made a console, and they advertised that console to people who didn't play video games. Now shut up.
Sony owns a variety of companies that produce games which run on the PlayStation. There is a such thing as a Sony first-party game.
You fucking ass.
EDIT: Cite where Sony's marketing was targeted at non-gamers. Because I have never, ever seen an ad by Sony directed at people who don't give a shit about video games.
I don't feel like doing that. I don't think I'm going to. But I will tell you to think back to the glitzy bullshit Playstation ads from the 90's.
No. Sony attempted to get more people into gaming. That widens the market and makes the medium more accessible. That's good.
Nintendo is trying to get people who don't care and will never care about gaming to buy games. That shifts the market focus over to people who don't give a shit about games, which drops the overall quality; why do a good job when people will pay for shit?
1) You really aren't qualified to make the emboldened statement since, you know, you can't see into the future.
I can make that statement. That is a very easy statement to make after reading about what Miyamoto said this week. I don't need to see into the future; what Miyamoto said is now in the past.
2) Can you please explain how "getting more people into gaming" and "trying to get people who don't care about gaming" are different? Isn't that the entire point of any and all marketing? So Nintendo is taking that concept a step further and making simple games to hook people into gaming. Are they saying to all developers for the Wii, "You have to make schlock so that we can get more money,"? No, they aren't.
I will gladly explain the difference. You can produce a work of art which is flashy and appeals to the general public but which also is solid in terms of artistic merit. For example, Final Fantasy 7. Although not my favorite, it is a solid, well-made game. The marketing showed off the FMVs, the high-quality graphics that were available and were new at the time, instead of, say, the Materia system. So it reached out to people who were not yet gamers with something anyone can understand (pretty graphics), and delivered a product which coupled those easy-to-swallow elements with solid gameplay mechanics. Someone who buys and plays this game is drawn in by the general-public elements, but is introduced to a well-made game that may lead to a genuine appreciation of gaming. The Wii is attempting to sell to middle-aged women by pushing shit like the Weather Channel and the Everybody Votes Channel; things that have nothing whatsoever to do with gaming. Even if you sell to these people, you will not get them interested in gaming because the element that you used to sell to them is not tied in any significant way to appreciating gaming.
3) Who are you to dictate that every person Nintendo reaches with this new strategy isn't interested in gaming? Not to mention that if "they will never care about games", Nintendo is (apparently) doomed to failure anyway, so you don't have anything to worry about.
I never said "every" person. Statistically speaking, that's impossible; there's always gonna be at least one, right? But since good gaming isn't included in the mix, it's going to be many fewer people. Also, no, that doesn't doom Nintendo to failure. That's one outcome, yeah. But another one is that gaming gets super dumbed-down so that horseshit that wouldn't even get shelf space today ends up taking shelf space tomorrow. The result is that good art becomes harder to find, not because the market is "mainstream," but because the market is increasingly actively aimed at people who don't even fucking care.
I may not have stated that clearly, I'm staying up late and working so I'm a little tired. Hopefully it makes enough sense that you can follow what I'm trying to express.
4) Finally, why do a good job in that case? Because there are guys like me and you out there in the industry right fucking now, looking at a half-finished game and saying that it is not enough. There will always be developers willing to take the time and effort to put together something amazing.
There will always be guys like me who have to get the graphics or whatever just right, and they'll tweak level three with a fucking controller all night long. But you know who won't care? The producers and the publishers. Look at Gamespot's "worst games of the year" for whatever year, say 2005 or something. A lot of those games are just half-finished products where some producer or publisher just said "fuck it, push that shit out the door," and out it went. The developers might not be happy with it. They might withdraw their names from the credits. But they can't make it into a good product, because the bean-counters think it'll make more money this way.
Cite where Sony's marketing was targeted at non-gamers. Because I have never, ever seen an ad by Sony directed at people who don't give a shit about video games.
I don't feel like doing that. I don't think I'm going to. But I will tell you to think back to the glitzy bullshit Playstation ads from the 90's.
I know what ads you're talking about. I think there was a PA comic about it, actually.
I agree that those ads were mainstreaming it with MTV-watching retards. However, that crowd was the same as the demographic already playing games. Probably less nerdy. But the same demographic other than that. Sony was going after people that they could convert into gamers. Nintendo is currently going after people who will never be gamers. That's the difference.
Defender on
0
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
No. Sony attempted to get more people into gaming. That widens the market and makes the medium more accessible. That's good.
Nintendo is trying to get people who don't care and will never care about gaming to buy games. That shifts the market focus over to people who don't give a shit about games, which drops the overall quality; why do a good job when people will pay for shit?
1) You really aren't qualified to make the emboldened statement since, you know, you can't see into the future.
I can make that statement. That is a very easy statement to make after reading about what Miyamoto said this week. I don't need to see into the future; what Miyamoto said is now in the past.
2) Can you please explain how "getting more people into gaming" and "trying to get people who don't care about gaming" are different? Isn't that the entire point of any and all marketing? So Nintendo is taking that concept a step further and making simple games to hook people into gaming. Are they saying to all developers for the Wii, "You have to make schlock so that we can get more money,"? No, they aren't.
I will gladly explain the difference. You can produce a work of art which is flashy and appeals to the general public but which also is solid in terms of artistic merit. For example, Final Fantasy 7. Although not my favorite, it is a solid, well-made game. The marketing showed off the FMVs, the high-quality graphics that were available and were new at the time, instead of, say, the Materia system. So it reached out to people who were not yet gamers with something anyone can understand (pretty graphics), and delivered a product which coupled those easy-to-swallow elements with solid gameplay mechanics. Someone who buys and plays this game is drawn in by the general-public elements, but is introduced to a well-made game that may lead to a genuine appreciation of gaming. The Wii is attempting to sell to middle-aged women by pushing shit like the Weather Channel and the Everybody Votes Channel; things that have nothing whatsoever to do with gaming. Even if you sell to these people, you will not get them interested in gaming because the element that you used to sell to them is not tied in any significant way to appreciating gaming.
3) Who are you to dictate that every person Nintendo reaches with this new strategy isn't interested in gaming? Not to mention that if "they will never care about games", Nintendo is (apparently) doomed to failure anyway, so you don't have anything to worry about.
I never said "every" person. Statistically speaking, that's impossible; there's always gonna be at least one, right? But since good gaming isn't included in the mix, it's going to be many fewer people. Also, no, that doesn't doom Nintendo to failure. That's one outcome, yeah. But another one is that gaming gets super dumbed-down so that horseshit that wouldn't even get shelf space today ends up taking shelf space tomorrow. The result is that good art becomes harder to find, not because the market is "mainstream," but because the market is increasingly actively aimed at people who don't even fucking care.
I may not have stated that clearly, I'm staying up late and working so I'm a little tired. Hopefully it makes enough sense that you can follow what I'm trying to express.
4) Finally, why do a good job in that case? Because there are guys like me and you out there in the industry right fucking now, looking at a half-finished game and saying that it is not enough. There will always be developers willing to take the time and effort to put together something amazing.
There will always be guys like me who have to get the graphics or whatever just right, and they'll tweak level three with a fucking controller all night long. But you know who won't care? The producers and the publishers. Look at Gamespot's "worst games of the year" for whatever year, say 2005 or something. A lot of those games are just half-finished products where some producer or publisher just said "fuck it, push that shit out the door," and out it went. The developers might not be happy with it. They might withdraw their names from the credits. But they can't make it into a good product, because the bean-counters think it'll make more money this way.
I had a nice argument or statement in response all of this but then I accidentally hit the back button on my mouse. I really need to remap that shit. Anyway. I'm too lazy to retype all that shit so the short version is that you're wrong and I win. OH HO HO.
Seriously, though. Good discussion. I'm off to play videogames now.
I had a nice argument or statement in response all of this but then I accidentally hit the back button on my mouse. I really need to remap that shit. Anyway. I'm too lazy to retype all that shit so the short version is that you're wrong and I win. OH HO HO.
Seriously, though. Good discussion. I'm off to play videogames now.
Yeah, it was fun, and I found the specific reference to the MTV-ish ads to be an interesting point to work with. As for me, my little fuckers now run their animations properly (thanks for the retarded bugs, Gamebryo KFM builder!), so I can sleep.
so if I care about gaming but don't like the wii where do I fall in all this
That's pretty much where I am now, until I see third-party developers ignore Nintendo and make, you know, good games for the system. Which will be hard since Nintendo does things like tell them "you are not allowed to put online play into your game."
so if I care about gaming but don't like the wii where do I fall in all this
That's pretty much where I am now, until I see third-party developers ignore Nintendo and make, you know, good games for the system. Which will be hard since Nintendo does things like tell them "you are not allowed to put online play into your game."
That is a little bit misleading. I believe the article you are referencing is below and he is currently not allowed to add online now, and he speculates that no online for the rest of 2007 for third parties. A Pokemon game (forget the full name) is coming out in June of this year which will be the first online game for the Wii.
so if I care about gaming but don't like the wii where do I fall in all this
That's pretty much where I am now, until I see third-party developers ignore Nintendo and make, you know, good games for the system. Which will be hard since Nintendo does things like tell them "you are not allowed to put online play into your game."
That is a little bit misleading. I believe the article you are referencing is below and he is currently not allowed to add online now, and he speculates that no online for the rest of 2007 for third parties. A Pokemon game (forget the full name) is coming out in June of this year which will be the first online game for the Wii.
so if I care about gaming but don't like the wii where do I fall in all this
That's pretty much where I am now, until I see third-party developers ignore Nintendo and make, you know, good games for the system. Which will be hard since Nintendo does things like tell them "you are not allowed to put online play into your game."
That is a little bit misleading. I believe the article you are referencing is below and he is currently not allowed to add online now, and he speculates that no online for the rest of 2007 for third parties. A Pokemon game (forget the full name) is coming out in June of this year which will be the first online game for the Wii.
Posts
"Sony" doesn't even make games. They made a console, and they advertised that console to people who didn't play video games. Now shut up.
Sony owns a variety of companies that produce games which run on the PlayStation. There is a such thing as a Sony first-party game.
You fucking ass.
EDIT: Cite where Sony's marketing was targeted at non-gamers. Because I have never, ever seen an ad by Sony directed at people who don't give a shit about video games.
@Bryceforvice on Twitter Facebook
1) You really aren't qualified to make the emboldened statement since, you know, you can't see into the future.
2) Can you please explain how "getting more people into gaming" and "trying to get people who don't care about gaming" are different? Isn't that the entire point of any and all marketing? So Nintendo is taking that concept a step further and making simple games to hook people into gaming. Are they saying to all developers for the Wii, "You have to make schlock so that we can get more money,"? No, they aren't.
3) Who are you to dictate that every person Nintendo reaches with this new strategy isn't interested in gaming? Not to mention that if "they will never care about games", Nintendo is (apparently) doomed to failure anyway, so you don't have anything to worry about.
4) Finally, why do a good job in that case? Because there are guys like me and you out there in the industry right fucking now, looking at a half-finished game and saying that it is not enough. There will always be developers willing to take the time and effort to put together something amazing.
I don't feel like doing that. I don't think I'm going to. But I will tell you to think back to the glitzy bullshit Playstation ads from the 90's.
I can make that statement. That is a very easy statement to make after reading about what Miyamoto said this week. I don't need to see into the future; what Miyamoto said is now in the past.
I will gladly explain the difference. You can produce a work of art which is flashy and appeals to the general public but which also is solid in terms of artistic merit. For example, Final Fantasy 7. Although not my favorite, it is a solid, well-made game. The marketing showed off the FMVs, the high-quality graphics that were available and were new at the time, instead of, say, the Materia system. So it reached out to people who were not yet gamers with something anyone can understand (pretty graphics), and delivered a product which coupled those easy-to-swallow elements with solid gameplay mechanics. Someone who buys and plays this game is drawn in by the general-public elements, but is introduced to a well-made game that may lead to a genuine appreciation of gaming. The Wii is attempting to sell to middle-aged women by pushing shit like the Weather Channel and the Everybody Votes Channel; things that have nothing whatsoever to do with gaming. Even if you sell to these people, you will not get them interested in gaming because the element that you used to sell to them is not tied in any significant way to appreciating gaming.
I never said "every" person. Statistically speaking, that's impossible; there's always gonna be at least one, right? But since good gaming isn't included in the mix, it's going to be many fewer people. Also, no, that doesn't doom Nintendo to failure. That's one outcome, yeah. But another one is that gaming gets super dumbed-down so that horseshit that wouldn't even get shelf space today ends up taking shelf space tomorrow. The result is that good art becomes harder to find, not because the market is "mainstream," but because the market is increasingly actively aimed at people who don't even fucking care.
I may not have stated that clearly, I'm staying up late and working so I'm a little tired. Hopefully it makes enough sense that you can follow what I'm trying to express.
There will always be guys like me who have to get the graphics or whatever just right, and they'll tweak level three with a fucking controller all night long. But you know who won't care? The producers and the publishers. Look at Gamespot's "worst games of the year" for whatever year, say 2005 or something. A lot of those games are just half-finished products where some producer or publisher just said "fuck it, push that shit out the door," and out it went. The developers might not be happy with it. They might withdraw their names from the credits. But they can't make it into a good product, because the bean-counters think it'll make more money this way.
I know what ads you're talking about. I think there was a PA comic about it, actually.
I agree that those ads were mainstreaming it with MTV-watching retards. However, that crowd was the same as the demographic already playing games. Probably less nerdy. But the same demographic other than that. Sony was going after people that they could convert into gamers. Nintendo is currently going after people who will never be gamers. That's the difference.
I had a nice argument or statement in response all of this but then I accidentally hit the back button on my mouse. I really need to remap that shit. Anyway. I'm too lazy to retype all that shit so the short version is that you're wrong and I win. OH HO HO.
Seriously, though. Good discussion. I'm off to play videogames now.
Yeah, it was fun, and I found the specific reference to the MTV-ish ads to be an interesting point to work with. As for me, my little fuckers now run their animations properly (thanks for the retarded bugs, Gamebryo KFM builder!), so I can sleep.
Twitter | Facebook | Tumblr | Last.fm | Pandora | LibraryThing | formspring | Blue Moon over Seattle (MCFC)
They cast a shadow like a sundial in the morning light. It was half past 10.
I'm not really aching to get a Wii.
you dont post a lot anymore
have you come out of winter hibernation
That's pretty much where I am now, until I see third-party developers ignore Nintendo and make, you know, good games for the system. Which will be hard since Nintendo does things like tell them "you are not allowed to put online play into your game."
That is a little bit misleading. I believe the article you are referencing is below and he is currently not allowed to add online now, and he speculates that no online for the rest of 2007 for third parties. A Pokemon game (forget the full name) is coming out in June of this year which will be the first online game for the Wii.
http://www.nintendowiifanboy.com/2007/03/03/snk-president-talks-about-neo-geo-on-the-vc/
Yeah, but isn't Pokemon first-party? I got the impression that third-party games were treated differently, at least for now.
i feel old
"If you're going to play tiddly winks, play it with man hole covers."
- John McCallum
oh man
i love me some WoW
"If you're going to play tiddly winks, play it with man hole covers."
- John McCallum
Also, all sources of that 'interview' point to Spong, which is a bastion of false news.