Macworld's analysis of E3 - Nintendo/MS/Sony are "complacent swine", "out of touch"

[Snake]

2010 is the year of the reboot. As I type this on my MacBook Pro in my air-conditioned hotel room in Los Angeles, I've just sat through presentations by three major console companies and I don't there was an original idea among them. The old is new again. Everyone is making motion controller games. Everyone is making 3D games. Everyone is remaking the games that made them famous. Look for new Sonic, Mortal Kombat, Gears of War, Halo, Zelda, Metroid, Medal of Honor, Castlevania, and Twisted Metal in the coming year. I walked the floor of E3 until my flip-flops broke in protest at the mediocrity. When your footwear is sounding off about the originality of your industry, you know you're in a tough place.

 

Microsoft's presentation on Monday set the tone for the week: There's a new Halo game coming out, but this time with space battles. The entire presentation reminded me of that Simpsons episode where Malibu Stacy gets a new hat. Halo: New Hat is due out sometime in the next year, will likely set some sales records, but will move the industry forward as much as a tractor on cinder blocks.

 

On Tuesday, Nintendo unveiled its own pageant of the past, where the Japanese gaming giant updated all of the titles that made it famous twenty years ago and this seemingly was something to celebrate. If you want to buy Zelda's Wind Waker crossed with Twilight Princess, Nintendo would like to sell you that game. Nintendo is so willing to sell it, in fact, that its willing to put adult men in front of thousands of people and have them swat pretend swords for your amusement. There were also retreads of Metroid and Kid Icarus and if these titles mean anything to you, that means you probably remember blowing into cartridges to make them work.

 

The saddest bunny that Nintendo pulled out of its hat was the trailer for a new Goldeneye 007 game. The reveal was met not by wowed enthusiasm, but instead with the sound of thousands of hands slapping a thousand foreheads. Electronic Arts tried to reboot/cash-in the Goldeneye franchise years ago with Goldeneye: Rogue Agent. Rogue Agent was a horrid mess of a game with a great premise; this new Goldeneye title looks like a horrid mess of a game with a bad premise. Nintendo is essentially trying to remaster a masterpiece while updating it with things like Daniel Craig's face.

 

There is no way the game can live up to the iconic Nintendo 64 first person shooter, and without the original developers from Rare, this new Goldeneye will be as well received as Blue Brothers 2000 or New Coke.

 

On the show floor, I later played the new Goldeneye 007, and I can confirm that you still can't play first person shooters on the Wii and oh yeah, if you want to remake Goldeneye, at least make sure it looks better than third party mod like Goldeneye: Source.

 

The Nintendo 3DS will sell like gangbusters but it still doesn't signal that Nintendo has any understanding of how the mobile market is changing. Sure, the 3DS has 3D graphics without glasses--but also without a sense of perspective. That is to say, Apple is eating their market and Nintendo's Reggie Fils-Aime is sitting in the white Buick with the devil as they go over the cliff, laughing, a la Thelma and Louise.

 

Sony at least knows that the casual gaming market is gone to them. Apple's SDK can't be beaten by conventional platforms or conventional weapons, so at Sony's presentation, Sony reps took time to mew that their PSP platform is for "serious gamers." Which would explain the declining sales.

 

The three big console developers, previously unchallenged in their supremacy, have become complacent swine, out of touch with the modern gamer. They keep making games that they already made because they know they will sell, not because they will be challenging, creative, or fun. How many times has Zelda been remade? Do we really need yet another Mortal Kombat, Twisted Metal, or Halo game? The snake is eating its own tail.

 

I don't have a problem with reboots per say, so long as we also have new franchises, new titles, and new genres to explore. And that what was lacking at E3 this year. While the big boys were wrestling over who had the better motion controls and who could find the most obscure old game they could remake, quietly you began to wonder how long the industry could keep this up. Hiring models to promote your game and giving away free Xbox 360s to journalists is only going to keep the barbarians at bay for so long

 

 

 

Source: http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/arti...tendo_sony.html

[playstation]

galat toh nahi bola reha hai...

[Cash]

True in some way. But we do need another MGS,UC,Forza,ME..

[AtheK]

True in some way. But we do need another MGS,UC,Forza,ME..

guess the article is intended more for users like you, i agree with lot of what he says...the fact actually remains not even a single new IP was revealed...

[jDaMn]

Most games are doing the same thing, just with better graphics. Sometimes without even that

 

Call of Duty

FIFA

GTA

Halo?

 

But look at what MS/Sony/Ninty have done. They have basically given people the option to play a limited set of games at lower cost while anything else is very hard to make/sell.

 

- Three different systems, with ZERO compatibility. Games have to be developed separately for each, with a payment made to MSSN.

- Money given to developers/publishers. Further restricting the market.

- Control of the economics. Can anyone really decide what price to sell their game at? Or is it, again, restricted by what those three will allow?

- No company can even put a game out on a console without permission from MSSN.

- With costs going up, smaller segments of the market are locked out because they are not worth it.

- New franchises are being passed over. EA has already said they will go the Acti way with yearly releases.

- Smaller companies have it much harder now, and keep a smaller portion of the revenue. Publishers control most of the risk/reward.

 

The best thing for us is if many services like OnLive come up. Companies like MS, Sony and Nintendo are pushing out open platforms (PC).

 

New gamers may still like playing through some of the stuff out there like in the post above^ but we've already had one 'bored of gaming' thread.

 

It's true for me

[Solitaire]

I like how they plug apple shamelessly even in that article

[ColorCodePurple]

I like how they plug apple shamelessly even in that article

Agreed.

 

They are the big 3 of the console for a reason.Infact they are the big 3 by divine right.

And if apple is looking to steal their crown they should try harder Ipad isnt going to take them anywhere

[MarketTantrik]

So what? Only new stuff makes an E3 event worthwhile? What about the new technology being showcased? Doesnt that count for something? The NDS made so many new types of games possible. Kinect / Dildo / 3DS will allow for developers to test new types of gameplay and ideas leading to new ways to play old favorites or entirely new IPs altogether. Also, there is a reason for the saying "old is gold" and for beloved franchises being beloved.

 

 

Crap perspective is crap.

[Shantz]

I am surprised why is macworld actually covering gaming..

[Noctis]

Agreed with MT.

 

And why are people complaining about lack of new IPs? The consumers are literally Forcing the companies to stick with big franchises.

[lithuvien]

Next people will critize Apple for bringing out iPhone 4 instead of developing a whole new phone

[jDaMn]

And why are people complaining about lack of new IPs? The consumers are literally Forcing the companies to stick with big franchises.

This cannot be accepted as correct. The market itself is being restricted by a few companies.

 

I'm not saying I think you're wrong, all I'm saying is that statement is not necessarily true.

 

Think about it, with only 3 players in the console market, who has the ability to 'force' anything? For these players, it doesn't matter if a game is good or not - they just need a sufficiently high number of releases, and for some % of that to sell well.

 

If the market was more competitive (and this is NOT) and there was a more direct link between developers and end consumers - now that'd be nice.

 

Oh and yes, the article is a shameless plug for Apple

[Noctis]

I'm not saying I think you're wrong, all I'm saying is that statement is not necessarily true.

 

If the market was more competitive (and this is NOT) and there was a more direct link between developers and end consumers - now that'd be nice.

 

Consider the current sitation, most of the new IPs ends up in mediocre sales even after huge critical acclaim while big franchises sells in millions even when they end up being average. There is no doubt that the companies are being forced to stick with their franchises here.

 

And for your example, if only 1 among the 3 players ever purchase new IPs while all three goes for big franchises, thats obviously going to affect the kind of games that gets released.

[jDaMn]

Consider the current sitation, most of the new IPs ends up in mediocre sales even after huge critical acclaim while big franchises sells in millions even when they end up being average. There is no doubt that the companies are being forced to stick with their franchises here.

That is effectively attributing the entire end result to consumers. Consumers do not reject a game, they reject the value. The market is highly restricted in terms of what value can be offered to consumers on console systems. It is unfair to price all games high and then expect consumers to treat new ideas the same as old ones.

 

As with companies, consumers will also de-risk in such a situation. I guess the easiest way to do so is to go with tried and tested. It does not mean the market for video games is inherently biased against new ideas.

 

Again, I'm not saying that video gamers actually DO want more new stuff as compared to to say movies or music. All I'm saying is that in a non-competitive market, it is not so perfectly clear. And the console market is definitely not competitive. FFS, both the 360 and PS3 use 3.2 Ghz rated processors. Is that a coincidence considering the chips were developed to custom specifications? But yes, MS got to launch early whereas Sony went with the 'extra cores' marketing BS.

 

All the pricing, discounting, marketing and even the initial selection of which games get the go ahead (and a say in plot, graphics etc.) is controlled by third parties. Their interest is in total revenue and not the effort it would take to get a lot of successful individual games.

 

As for the critical acclaim, it is not a very good way to compare games. Reviewers just don't differentiate much between games. That is, they tend to score most games in a 1. high & 2. narrow band within a (for example) wider 10 point scale.

[jDaMn]

And for your example, if only 1 among the 3 players ever purchase new IPs while all three goes for big franchises, thats obviously going to affect the kind of games that gets released.

Players as in market players (MS, Nintendo, Sony). Not video game players.

[MarketTantrik]

@jDamn: Take the fate of Mirrors Edge and Alan Wake. Two new IPs, two terrific new games, one with an amazing, innovative concept that hadn't been done on any type of meaningful scale before. What did a majority of consumers do? Buy FIFA / Madden / Halo / CoD etc. etc.

 

On the other hand, you have the Wii Fit, that is new, innovative, never been done before and it has sold in the tens of millions, but offers a very different proposition to consumers and is not actually a traditional videogame.

[Noctis]

That is effectively attributing the entire end result to consumers. Consumers do not reject a game, they reject the value. The market is highly restricted in terms of what value can be offered to consumers on console systems. It is unfair to price all games high and then expect consumers to treat new ideas the same as old ones.

 

Same result. When taking a new IP and a famous franchise of the same quality, if the consumers are willing to pay much less for the new IP then the industry is still forced to rely on the franchises.

 

 

As for the critical acclaim, it is not a very good way to compare games. Reviewers just don't differentiate much between games. That is, they tend to score most games in a 1. high & 2. narrow band within a (for example) wider 10 point scale.

 

Critical acclaim as just a basis of comparison here. If you actually consider the fan reaction then these new IPs are often far far better.

 

Ill give you some examples here-

 

Consider SE, a company often accused of bringing out endless remakes, spin offs etc. of their big franchises. But their best rpg this gen - WEWY for the DS is a new IP, which also happened to be one of their least selling games. A small comparison between the Japanese sales of some of their major titles-

 

World Ends With You - 190k

 

Dragon Quest IX - 4.2 million

 

DQ Monsters (spin off) - 2 million +

 

Final Fantasy IV remake (some 11th or so remake) - 612k

 

And Im not just basing this on a single comparison, you can take other developers like Tri ace in the difference of SO4 and RoF sales (RoF which was far better than SO4 sold extremely low comparatively) , Sega's low selling new IPs etc. More comparisons such as Blaz Blue Vs SF4/SC4 (pathetic sales for Blaz Blue comparatively, despite being one of the best in its genre) and many shooters and racers in the west (NFS?).

 

When the consumers starts to give more attention to new IPs the industry will bring more of them out. But with the current purchasing tendency most companies will just limit to few new IPs to reduce the risk.

 

edit: Add what MT said about the western market. And this mainly applies to the PS3/X360 and handheld audience.

[Bulovski]

But their best rpg this gen - WEWY for the DS is a new IP, which also happened to be one of their least selling games. A small comparison between the Japanese sales of some of their major titles-

It's one of their all time best and completely built for the DS. Shame it sold so less, even compared to the FF IV remake (superb FF but the DS version made it more comical than serious). At least FF III remake allowed western audiences to play the game.

[lithuvien]

Depends on how the new IP is handled as well. Seiken Densetsu, Persona, Darksiders, Halo were all hits.

[Noctis]

Depends on how the new IP is handled as well. Seiken Densetsu, Persona, Darksiders, Halo were all hits.

 

They did, but the no. of such instances are very low.

 

Also years of sales of Halo Combat Evolved, considered to be the best in the series was overtaken by Halo ODST sales in less than a year. Even after bungie leaves, a Halo game developed by 343 industries will sell well, far more than any new IP by them.