Who Killed Videogames? (A Ghost Story)

[Blurz]

Ignorance is quite prevalent on this forum it seems.

[Zing]

On a lighter note another FPS came out today.

EDIT

Tried to pick up PS3 Metal Gear Solid HD Collection
I figure I would beat the rush and went to Wallymart early this morning. Walls of Call of Duty for Xbox and PS3, Metal Gear HD is not carried at this location. All that shelf space wasted, keeping another game from being merchandised. Guitar Hero anyone?

This reminds me of the board game scene. When people hear "I play board games", they immediately think of junk like Monopoly, Sorry, Yahtzee, etc. Meanwhile, we are actually playing relatively obscure, low retail volume, high quality strategy games. We are relegated to buying almost all of the decent games online, or if we are are lucky, a single local shop within driving distance!

This is how it seems with video games. "I play Xbox" and you think of Halo, Call of Duty and other ultra-mainstream junk. Meanwhile, real gamers are playing the niche, quality titles. Stuff you won't find on an end cap at EB Games.

[pakopako]

Ignorance is quite prevalent on this forum it seems.

It's more common than one may think.

Besides, any large congression of people will have its ups and downs; not everyone can know everything and be everywhere.

[Opa Opa]

Ignorance is quite prevalent on this forum it seems.

Well ya got me there.

[SuperAnthony64]

Obviously, your argument is entirely based on your blind following of Nintendo. I mean, come on, it's Nintendo, but....

First off, I must say I own every Nintendo system, and every game from those franchises you mentioned. Second, note those are from a time called "the past" if you have ever heard of it. Third, I don't have, and never want, anything related Xbox but that is another discussion. I don't enjoy first person shooters unless they have something very unique or innovative about them, but I have played through many so I would be able to judge them fairly instead of basing my review of them on pre-conceived notions from watching YouTube videos, which is probably your main form of researching video games..

Note I never mentioned graphics, I enjoy (as you thoughtlessly put) "cartoony" graphics over developers attempting to recreate so-called reality. Pirating Dreamcast games killing Sega is also another discussion I will have to have with you, grasshopper.

From a technical standpoint, Nintendo (note I am usually referring to Nintendo of America when I mention the name) has been putting forward ill-conceived consoles for a while now. These very underpowered systems caused Nintendo to lose out on much support from third party developers, leaving the majority of the system's appeal to the few talented developers under Nintendo's control producing (mostly) outstanding first party titles. I did not question those either, but the alienation of the third party has brought down Nintendo's hold on the market.

Cell phone, Facebook, iTouch, and Android games are called apps for a reason. THEY ARE NOT GAMES. That is glaringly obvious, and needs no further detail.

Finally, the subject of "killing" video games can be taken many ways, but I will focus on the appeal of video games to the consumers (as this article does). This means the current market and what is available as of right now, not the past. Sony and Microsoft are now the big two because they are giving gamers what they ask for- casual and hardcore, new entry and veterans alike. Although I too dislike DLC and would like to have every gratuitous add-on available from the start, it is what the consumers want and it has been responded to. Say you would like the mechanics in a game updated, or an extra stage or character- the problem is not eternal, it can be easily changed and improved upon with a small fee to counteract the cost of production of this DLC. I will acknowledge in certain games the DLC system has been exploited grossly, but it is usually used to fulfill gamers’ desires. If Nintendo would acknowledge the consumers, glitches and bugs in their games would be swiftly eliminated, and (for example) Mario Galaxy 2 would have been released for a substantially lower price as an add-on to the game already owned instead of an entirely separate game. Shigeru Miyamoto said himself that he wished it would have been released as a “Mario Galaxy 1.5” so to speak.
Nintendo has been neglecting the most-desired games they own for a while, being most noticeable in the current generation. Many grade-A titles have been neglected to even be considered for release in America. Xenoblade Chronicles, The Last Story, and Fatal Frame 4 (only of which I have imported) are but a minority of the most relevant examples as of today. The biggest slap in the face to gamers by Nintendo has been ongoing for over a decade. You guessed it, the Mother series. Despite possessing translations for all three games, Nintendo refuses to release or consider re-releasing these games to the American consumers. Gamers thriving for such excellence are forced to pirate translated copies of these games, pay insane prices for the only one actually released state-side, or learn foreign languages. There is a exorbitant demand for a revival of these games, but Nintendo conveniently always has some excuse ready. Don't say that it is because of localization or licensing problems, because 1. All the games have official translations into English and 2. Mother references are in every Smash Brothers game.

Nintendo effectively "killed" video games by denying consumers what they desire, over-simplifying everything they decide to release, under-powering consoles and releasing them before they are prepared, and quite a few others.

Anyway, that is a short take on the subject. Don’t dismiss a valid opinion which can be factually backed-up because it does not coincide with your misguided notions.

All those games I mentioned are games from today. They might be old franchises but are still being made today except for Pikmin.

When someone comes out and calls Nintendo first party games childish they usually refer to them being cartoony. What childish Nintendo games are you referring to? I also dont base my opinions on youtube I base them on gameplay. Shooters have started to become more generic and strayed away from great mechanics like the Unreal series and Counter Strike. Now we get camping in the grass aiming down the sights with perks.

I agree that these"APP GAMES" are doing way more damage to the gaming market than anything else. People are ditching dedicated handhelds to play toilet games and time wasters.

When you speak of "DLC" you call it a nice little way for the gamer to get a little more out of the game for a fee. Look at Valve's handling of their DLC. Look how many L4D2 mpas came out for free on PC. Burnout Paradise gave free DLC for a year. Now look at Fallout 3 and NV dlc. $50 dollars to complete the game. IMO thats a crime. They continue this milking cause "gamers" support it. Saying "Super Mario Galaxy 2" is an expansion and not calling every other sequel is not right. I read what shigeru miyamoto said but they also came out and said they added more content then they originally thought they where adding. Time and time again they stated that Mother cant be released cause of copyrights. Would it be nice to have them here? Hell yes.

You mention Nintendo releases underpowered console. How? Underpowered by performance or by customer expectations.

Your whole comment seems to leaning toward hating Nintendo cause they refuse to release certain games. I dont like the fact that they are keeping those Wii games out of America. I also dont like the fact they canceled Project HAMMER and never released Disaster: Day of Crisis in America.

Keeping games out of America isnt killing the industry. Its the customer milking and the "APP Games" thats doing the damage. Casual games have been around for a long time so thats not doing it. You will always have casual and shovelware games. Companies will always try and capitalize of the top dog console. Look at the PS2.

[o.pwuaioc]

Sony and Microsoft are now the big two because they are giving gamers what they ask for- casual and hardcore, new entry and veterans alike.

Wikipedia doesn't have equal dates for all consoles, but you should still see from here who the winner is in this gen's console wars.

Wii – 89.36 million as of 30 September 2011
PlayStation 3 – 56 million as of 2 November 2011
Xbox 360 – 55 million as of 4 June 2011

Anyway, that is a short take on the subject. Don’t dismiss a valid opinion which can be factually backed-up because it does not coincide with your misguided notions.

What facts?

For the record, I highly doubt casuals are killing the market. If anything casuals are hearkening back to the golden age arcade games: remember Pac Man and Tetris? They were the more casual games than a good many apps now.

The problem is manifold and blame cannot be laid on one thing only. Personally I think it's not casual games but casual games on mini-computers in folks' pockets, aka "phones".

[SuperAnthony64]

Sony and Microsoft are now the big two because they are giving gamers what they ask for- casual and hardcore, new entry and veterans alike.

Really? Sony giving the gamers what they want? Look at Socom 4. People bitched about Confrontation being glitchy but it was still an addictive game to play. Now look at Socom 4. Came out and and tried to emulate the COD series. Do you know how pissed the Socom population was when S4 came out? Was Nintendo to blame for this screw up as well?

Microsoft hasn't really brought anything to the table at all. They ran on the success of Halo, Gears of War, and Call of Duty timed exclusive dlc. They even refuse to bring the rest of the Gears of War and Halo series to PC. PC gamers want those games but I guess its Nintendo stopping those ports from happening too. Something huh.

[Key-Glyph]

Personally I think it's not casual games but casual games on mini-computers in folks' pockets, aka "phones".

Agreed. I think the difference is not so much the type or quality of game as it is the medium through which it's played.

In my opinion, people who are discovering that they enjoy the act of playing video games only now that the content is on their phone and no longer limited to a console aren't lesser gamers (nor are those games "not real games"). It's just a different gaming style. These folks might not enjoy being tethered to the living room television for hours in order to play, or maybe they never imagined it could be worthwhile to spend money on any machine that specifically -- and only -- ran video games, even cheaper portable ones. I'm not holding these things against them. Welcome to the fold, I say.

These people might use the casual genre's appeal as a stepping stone for exploring other styles. That's a plus. Or perhaps they'll stay firmly entrenched in casual gaming, which I can't see as a negative. The rest of us will continue to exist with our own consumer needs to be met regardless.

Frankly I'm delighted that video games are being accepted as a normal thing for anyone of any age to enjoy in a myriad of styles, because that's what they actually are. There's nothing about being interested in this hobby that is inherently weird that only a tiny group of initiated souls "get," no matter what marketing or cultural perceptions say. The expanding consumer base isn't making the more immersed gamers like us any less special, nor is it diluting our club, which is what most of the ranting I read in other places on the internet seems to be about.

If all games turned into casual games, yes, I'd be sad -- but not sadder than if they swung the other way and all became 700+ hour realistic war shooters, a scenario I see as infinitely more likely.

[Michi]

Frankly I'm delighted that video games are being accepted as a normal thing for anyone of any age to enjoy in a myriad of styles, because that's what they actually are.

THIS. This. This. This.