Peter Moore Suggests Nintendo can grow the Industry

[bapenguin]

I feel like this headline is something that Kotaku (http://www.kotaku.com) would make up, but I find it quite interesting when the president of Microsoft Games makes a presentation on expanding the industry and on the very first slide is the Nintendo Wii.

From the Gamerscore Blog (http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archive/2006/08/04/536593.aspx):The theme of the conference was"Gaming to the 10th," a tribute to the exponential power of technological development that drives the rapidly expanding global videogames market. Attendees examined the state of the industry at all levels - from the very smallest statistics and micro tactics to the very largest macro trends and strategic thinking.

http://static.flickr.com/57/206810665_35fae74bfe_m.jpg

The Wii60 movement gains even more ground

[TrackZero]

Peter Moore is shrewd enough to know that Nintendo and MS don't have significant overlap in their target markets, and giving credit/assisting sales of their platform only helps further shrink Sony's marketshare (which arguably has more overlap with the big N than MSes ever has, due to a wider spread of family oriented titles on the PS2/GC).

Now to let the Sony fanboys attack me for pointing that out. Have a good night all!

[Sion]

Dan Shoe can eat a dick.

[Blade]

He can, but will he choose to? Only the gods know.

[Doctor Setebos]

Please also note that there are a couple of PS2 games and a Playstation Eye Toy on that slide, as well. They're talking about growth of the entire industry, not just the Wii60 advantage.

Though I love that they are acknowledging that every gaming entertainment provider is bringing something to the table to increase the demographic. That's no small accomplishment.

[Chang3]

Ah, som3 n3ws that its not n3ws, or just 3vil Avatar is trying to mak3 the ps3 sound lik3 the shitty gam3 consol3, this fuck3r is bann3d, for bi3ng a fuck3r.
H3ar me now, the ps3 is just 3 months away, so have Fun whil3 you 360 fans hav3 th3 chanc3, becaus3 the 360 is d3ad b3for3 you know it...
Chang3 is officialy Bann3d

[Doctor Setebos]

It might also be worth mentioning that on the sixth slide, the bullet point states: "More games for more people", and it shows box art for Brain Age and Nintendogs for the DS. Very cool, Microsoft. :D

[Rook34]

Ah, som3 n3ws that its not n3ws, or just 3vil Avatar is trying to mak3 the ps3 sound lik3 the shitty gam3 consol3, this fuck3r is bann3d, for bi3ng a fuck3r.
H3ar me now, the ps3 is just 3 months away, so have Fun whil3 you 360 fans hav3 th3 chanc3, becaus3 the 360 is d3ad b3for3 you know it...
Chang3 is officialy Bann3d

Dude, I'm not trying to be mean here, especially since you're still smoking from the flaming you got last time by others, but you really should change the way you type. This is a pretty advanced community here with well thought out discussions and a generally more mature crowd. Not only will you annoy others, but we will simply not even bother reading your posts, or worse you may get banned. Please change.

[Camel]

On that slide I see a Nintendo section, a Microsoft section, and Sony section. Based on that slide, this news could just as easily have been "Peter Moore Suggests Sony can grow the Industry." I'm certainly not trying to stick up for Sony or bash Nintendo (my preferences usually lean more to the Nintendo side of things anyways), but I think the real point is what DoctorSetebos said....each company can bring something to the table to help expand the industry.

[Xenkylm]

Ah, som3 n3ws that its not n3ws, or just 3vil Avatar is trying to mak3 the ps3 sound lik3 the shitty gam3 consol3, this fuck3r is bann3d, for bi3ng a fuck3r.
H3ar me now, the ps3 is just 3 months away, so have Fun whil3 you 360 fans hav3 th3 chanc3, becaus3 the 360 is d3ad b3for3 you know it...
Chang3 is officialy Bann3d

get over yourself.

::edit::

Camel, I love your sig quote.

[Zeal]

I'll find a new hobby if Microsoft ever supports Nintendo.

[Johan]

Change: When will you be banned?

I'm interested in the somewhat divergent options each of the consoles seem to be offering this gen...will be a very good few years ahead.

[Hemalin]

Jesus Christ the first 6 or so comments in that link make me glad I read Evil Avatar.

But then there's people like Change, I thought Bap already gave him a warning?

[Xenkylm]

Jesus Christ the first 6 or so comments in that link make me glad I read Evil Avatar.

Well then, we probably shouldn't let the whole thread get off track ;)

Anyway, I can't decide whether Peter Moore is the best thing to happen to videogames, or some lurking menace who's putting on a smiley face until that right moment, and then POUNCE!

I totally get the Wii60 concept and his motivation for perpetuating it, but at some point I get the feeling that Nintendo is gonna just step in and say "hey, um.. look you're nice and all, but the rest of the guys have been talking and we don't really want you to come to poker night anymore." The Wii was always going to be a "second system," in my mind, so it seems like Peter's the only person who benefits from this positioning.

This isn't an alliance. This is just mooching.

[thecrazyd]

I'll find a new hobby if Microsoft ever supports Nintendo.
Well? Go ahead then.

[Kefkataran]

I'll find a new hobby if Microsoft ever supports Nintendo.

Oh sweet God yes. Jesus. I need to get that Peter Moore interview STAT.

But then there's people like Change, I thought Bap already gave him a warning?

I have a feeling he'll be getting banned.

[Zanzibar]

get over yourself.

::edit::

Camel, I love your sig quote.

I like his 'title' as well. BIG Back to the Future fan here.

[Deathbane27]

I'll find a new hobby if Microsoft ever supports Nintendo.

Is that a promise?

[blackzc]

I'll find a new hobby if Microsoft ever supports Nintendo.

What does it hurt?

[King Chaos]

Uhu hu... secretly a majority of Nintendo stock has already been bought by Microsoft. :D

[easi]

What does MS bring to the table in this 'alliance'? A slew of mediocre games and the ability to shout at other people in multiplayer while onlookers shake their heads and pity you? :confused:

[bKangy]

Or the only so far working online marketplace system and omnipresent online login, easi? What MS has achieved DEFINES their console so far.

[easi]

Call me crazy, but I care more about having actual good games to play than buzzwords and marketing guff, which is what you just said.

[bapenguin]

Ah, som3 n3ws that its not n3ws, or just 3vil Avatar is trying to mak3 the ps3 sound lik3 the shitty gam3 consol3, this fuck3r is bann3d, for bi3ng a fuck3r.
H3ar me now, the ps3 is just 3 months away, so have Fun whil3 you 360 fans hav3 th3 chanc3, becaus3 the 360 is d3ad b3for3 you know it...
Chang3 is officialy Bann3d

Yes you are officially BANNED.

http://www.evilavatar.com/images/thumbs/banhammer.jpg

[TrackZero]

Yes you are officially BANNED.

Booyah! Big thanks bap.

[thecrazyd]

Yes you are officially BANNED.
Thanks ba, I owe you five bucks.

[Rirath]

Sigh, I always love to see the BAN HAMMER make an appearance.

Am I the only one who shouts "BAAAAAANN HAAAAMMEEER!" in his loudest viking-esque voice?
(while striking the pose :o )

[bean19]

I'd have liked this article more if it had focused more on the points he is making than the consoles he is talked about too bap. The full list of things from the Gamerscore blog are definitely things that Nintendo has done the best at, so I understand the comparison, but instead of people going nuts console fanboy, we could have talked about this stuff:

1. Beyond The Boys In Their Bedrooms. Appeal to a much wider audience.

2. Don’t Pass The Buck On Rising Development Costs. We need to find ways to reduce costs and restructure our revenue models.

3. Rebel Without A Platform: Bring Aspiring Developers Into The Fold. For too long we’ve expected the developers of the future to claw their way up to us … we have to start coming to them and proactively develop a farm team of future stars.

4. It’s A YouTube World: Embrace Community Created Content. We’re control freaks when it comes to how games are delivered to consumers. We need more spaces where garage designers can get noticed.

5. Set Us Free. We should look at delivering new IP in new ways that recognize how powerful a concept shaping your own gaming experience is.

6. We’re Too Cool For School: Make Ourselves More Approachable. Games are more powerful, but less approachable. We need to make more games for more people. Expand demographics, online gameplay, strong family settings.

7. Lower The Total Cost Of Ownership With Choice. Consumer should have choices, starting at entry level, purchases should be upgradable, don’t lock consumers in.

8. Treat Windows Like A Gaming Platform. Windows as a platform reaches more people than any console ever will.

1. You know. . . I bet the PS2 actually has the widest demographic. . . not the Xbox with it's shooters and racing games, or the Nintendo with it's small game library of games that are often thought of as "kiddie", so those examples on the first slide are really good. It is good to have kiddie games, rhythm games, and all kinds of different experiences that draw in more types of gamers. I think Microsoft's whole reason for Viva Pinata is to have at least one game (they really need more of them) that will make the console a good choice for parents who have children who vary in age but who will all be playing the same console. A 13 year-old is going to want a PS3 or a 360, so a parent who is also shopping for an 8 year old TOO might decide to get a 360 because of Viva Pinata - and hopefully more games that can appeal to broad age groups (well, there is Kameo too - but more than 2).

2. Not passing the buck on rising development costs - I hope he means that publishers shouldn't be passing it along to us, the consumers, or passing it along to developers.

Publishers have an interesting business. They get to charge against the cost of the game for services they perform like marketing and printing the box and CDs and distribution, etc. All of their "expenses" for a game must be paid through the sell of the game before the developer receives a dime beyond what they were given as an advance to create the title. So, in most cases, a publisher actually makes money on a game even if it doesn't show a "profit" to the point where the developer makes more.

So the "rising costs of development" mean that the publisher has to give up a larger chunk of the pie on every game. . . but they are making money anyway. . . well on games that are even borderline successful. This is more risk for same reward, so publishers DO worry about this. Still, there are other places to cut costs on games besides development. It seems ridiculous to me that development of games is often only about 20% of the actual cost of delivering a game to market.

Online distribution of games probably can't come fast enough. Saving on marketing and paying graft to brick and mortar stores will definitely help developers receive more of the dollars we put into gaming. . . unfortunately for publishers, it will also mean that they do not get to have as much leverage in cooking the books in their favor.

3. Bringing new developers into the fold - I don't know how you do this? Honestly it seems like there are plenty of talented and intelligent developers out there whose original ideas are stifled by having too many cooks in a kitchen. Maybe they should look at promoting more talented producers who know how to give really talented people their space but who can also edit when needed, etc.

4. Community Created Content - Whee! Microsoft LOVES this point, so how about they actually do something about it instead of simply bringing it up at conferences over and over. :)

5. More open-ended free-choice games - Great point really. . . and honestly this is a bit more sophisticated than what I would expect from an executive. He probably does actually play games. Will Wright and the success of games like The Sims really proves that there is a broad mass-market appeal for games sandbox "play" games. What happens if I do X games. Hopefully Microsoft will follow through on this.

6. Same point as #1, but with an emphasis on making games that aren't intimidating. Nintendo is awesome at this. The Mario titles are incredibly disarming and easy to pick up. . . especially games like Mario Party and Mario Kart that are intended to let players of any skill level pick them up and just start playing. However, they are also very "light". While I would enjoy playing Mario Party online with real-life friends or at home on the same screen, the game is really insipid and silly after a while. . . I couldn't imagine playing it online with strangers (at least for long). Mario Kart would be fun online too. . . making some games like Mario Kart or Mario Tennis would be really good for the system, though I wouldn't want them to the exclusion of titles that are intended for gamers.

7. Meh. They should get rid of the Core. People have to buy the hard-drive eventually so it is such a low value choice. Maybe there is appeal to people by offering a $300 system, but not having a HD and then needing to go buy it for $100 later. . . well that's annoying and not very competitive IMO.

8. Windows as a gaming platform - Trying to sell Vista again. Whee!

[Camel]

good post bean19. I think it's a shame we don't have more of a discussion going here (one which I unfortunately have little to add to at the moment), I am sure more people would be talking if this article was about Microsoft saying how Sony is making the industry stagnant or Nintendo isn't going to have a good showing with their new console or something like that. Most of the message here is pretty positive, I guess people have nothing to say about that (yet) if it doesn't involve them getting to put on their fanboy hats.

So anyways, I can see the different qualities that each company brings to the table, but it is interesting to me personally that the group leading the discussion here, Microsoft, actually has very little appeal to me. Live is awesome, and the few experiences I have had with it have been great. But I am much more of a "play friends with your buddies on the couch" type of gamer, so Live has very little long term appeal to me (that, and my internet connection is crappy). The reason I own the original Xbox was because Halo sucked me in and I was tired of being the only friend who didn't know how to play. I found lots of other games I liked for the system, but nothing that made me say "OH MAN, I've gotta get me a 360 so I can keep playing these games!" Halo might have done it, but Halo2 just didn't do it for me so the kibosh was put on that. Most of the Xbox games I own are ones that I could have got for other systems, so I got them for the one with the best loading times and graphics. Without Live, what appeal does the 360 have for me? Maybe I am missing something, but I would say none. There are a few games out and coming out that look appealing to me, but not engough to justify a system purchase, especially when none of the competition has launched yet.

Sony systems have some great games, and I agree with bean that they appeal to the largest amount of people, but right now the cost of a ps3 makes it out of the question for me. Maybe later...I am usually never an early adpoter of new systems.

As for Nintendo, I have always supported their consoles because I love their franchises...Mario, Legend of Zelda, etc. I loved them as a kid, and the nostalgia factor has carried me along (as have good games). The fact that they make a lot of games like Mario Kart and the like...low learning curve games that a lot of people can play at once and rotate out of...makes it that much more valuable of a system for me.

For someone like me, here is how I can see next generation playing out. A wii will be bought, because even though I am very happy with my purchase of an Xbox while my Gamecube sits gathering dust, I would rather have those few first party Nintendo franchises and a cheaper system, as well as games that my friends can easily get into, than buy a more expensive system with many games that may be nicer to look at but just don't appeal to me all that much in terms of gameplay as well as having an online facor that doesn't come into my equation (not saying the 360 has no good games or wont have games that I will like later, I'm just saying that right now it doesnt do it for me). As for Sony, despite the many many many many people who have owned a PS2 (including me...although I can't get it to read discs anymore), I think they will have a strong showing sooner or later, there are too many good game franchises that they have that people like (read: I like), but boy oh boy is that cost going to put some people off at first. I guess for me it all comes down to what games I have liked in the past. Microsoft is the new kid on the block, and despite hanging tough (*rimshot*) and doing very well for themselves, they dont bring anything to the table for me. The PS3 has a prohibitive cost and I'm the type of person who wouldn't buy their system just out of spite because of it. I'm going to stick with the cheapest console that has franchises I have always liked...end of story for me.

So one question I have...with all the talk about what each system can bring to consumers....does the 360 have an appeal besides the online-centered aspects? I feel like I am missing something here...


EDIT: nice to see some fellow Spinal Tap and Back to the Future fans as well :D

[MoJoBehaumat]

Man I see the X360 following the path of the ill fated Dreamcast :( Where is my killer app..hopefully this november in the vien of gears of ward :)
I hope that Microsoft can secure some games that have been named exclusives for the PS3:
Devil May Cry 4
Fatal Inertia
Virtual Fighter 5
Final Fantasy XIII
Final Fantasy Versu XIII
Warhawk
Lair
Hevenly Sword
Ridge Racer 7
MGS4

[Rook34]

Camel, I am the exact same way. Even though I have DSL, my internet connection is still crappy and I can't play online games well. I have never been online with my Xbox and never will. My friends either don't game, suck at gaming, or don't play the same games as I so I much prefer the single player games and could give a rats ass about online play, Phantasy Star was the exception for me, but I played it on Gamecube. It doesn't help either that I'm a cheapskate.
The PS3 price is a huge deterrent for me as I have other responsibilities, and like you, I won't buy it out of spite as well. I don't appreciate the price levied on consumers and the force feeding of blu-ray, nor the lack of HDMI ability in the core model, and as industry leaders I expected better of them. They are trying to change the market in a way I don't agree with and if it becomes the norm than I'll be finding a new hobby. Games are just that, GAMES. Somehow that word got lost in transition, but they did keep the FU for their new word.
Damn, I have to go. I will write more later.

[RevGored]

I'd have liked this article more if it had focused more on the points he is making than the consoles he is talked about too bap. The full list of things from the Gamerscore blog are definitely things that Nintendo has done the best at, so I understand the comparison, but instead of people going nuts console fanboy, we could have talked about this stuff:



1. You know. . . I bet the PS2 actually has the widest demographic. . . not the Xbox with it's shooters and racing games, or the Nintendo with it's small game library of games that are often thought of as "kiddie", so those examples on the first slide are really good. It is good to have kiddie games, rhythm games, and all kinds of different experiences that draw in more types of gamers. I think Microsoft's whole reason for Viva Pinata is to have at least one game (they really need more of them) that will make the console a good choice for parents who have children who vary in age but who will all be playing the same console. A 13 year-old is going to want a PS3 or a 360, so a parent who is also shopping for an 8 year old TOO might decide to get a 360 because of Viva Pinata - and hopefully more games that can appeal to broad age groups (well, there is Kameo too - but more than 2).

2. Not passing the buck on rising development costs - I hope he means that publishers shouldn't be passing it along to us, the consumers, or passing it along to developers.

Publishers have an interesting business. They get to charge against the cost of the game for services they perform like marketing and printing the box and CDs and distribution, etc. All of their "expenses" for a game must be paid through the sell of the game before the developer receives a dime beyond what they were given as an advance to create the title. So, in most cases, a publisher actually makes money on a game even if it doesn't show a "profit" to the point where the developer makes more.

So the "rising costs of development" mean that the publisher has to give up a larger chunk of the pie on every game. . . but they are making money anyway. . . well on games that are even borderline successful. This is more risk for same reward, so publishers DO worry about this. Still, there are other places to cut costs on games besides development. It seems ridiculous to me that development of games is often only about 20% of the actual cost of delivering a game to market.

Online distribution of games probably can't come fast enough. Saving on marketing and paying graft to brick and mortar stores will definitely help developers receive more of the dollars we put into gaming. . . unfortunately for publishers, it will also mean that they do not get to have as much leverage in cooking the books in their favor.

3. Bringing new developers into the fold - I don't know how you do this? Honestly it seems like there are plenty of talented and intelligent developers out there whose original ideas are stifled by having too many cooks in a kitchen. Maybe they should look at promoting more talented producers who know how to give really talented people their space but who can also edit when needed, etc.

4. Community Created Content - Whee! Microsoft LOVES this point, so how about they actually do something about it instead of simply bringing it up at conferences over and over. :)

5. More open-ended free-choice games - Great point really. . . and honestly this is a bit more sophisticated than what I would expect from an executive. He probably does actually play games. Will Wright and the success of games like The Sims really proves that there is a broad mass-market appeal for games sandbox "play" games. What happens if I do X games. Hopefully Microsoft will follow through on this.

6. Same point as #1, but with an emphasis on making games that aren't intimidating. Nintendo is awesome at this. The Mario titles are incredibly disarming and easy to pick up. . . especially games like Mario Party and Mario Kart that are intended to let players of any skill level pick them up and just start playing. However, they are also very "light". While I would enjoy playing Mario Party online with real-life friends or at home on the same screen, the game is really insipid and silly after a while. . . I couldn't imagine playing it online with strangers (at least for long). Mario Kart would be fun online too. . . making some games like Mario Kart or Mario Tennis would be really good for the system, though I wouldn't want them to the exclusion of titles that are intended for gamers.

7. Meh. They should get rid of the Core. People have to buy the hard-drive eventually so it is such a low value choice. Maybe there is appeal to people by offering a $300 system, but not having a HD and then needing to go buy it for $100 later. . . well that's annoying and not very competitive IMO.

8. Windows as a gaming platform - Trying to sell Vista again. Whee!


Bean, I'd like to discuss some of your points (some more than others)

1. This is completely true. The PS2 DOES have the largest software genre demographic in the industry, and this is because Sony has a lock on alot of developers, and starting on the PS2 is a good way to get noticed. This is where Sony is number 1 by a longshot. I think when Peter Moore mentions breaking out of the 18-36 demo, he's talking about the industry as a whole, but he means MS needs to.

2. Passing the buck - I think the best instance of this being circumvented is Nintendos' funding to outside developers to publish on the GBA. This was started with the branch group at Square who did FF Tactics Advance, and was then utilized on other titles as well. This is probably the best way to help intro-level groups get thier games out there. Fun fact - this was ok'd by Hiroshi Yamauchi, former N president, because he knew they needed Square, but refused to work with them directly, so the ok'd funding for a 'splinter group' of Square to start making FF titles on Nintendo systems again. He probably still hurts from Square going PS1 instead of N64.

3. Once again, Nintendo has the right idea - funding for small devs that allows decent repay time, and also lets you work on smaller-end titles. Microsoft also has this right with XBLA. If they open the doors to development on XBLA, this could be the most innovative thing they've added to the industry, bar none.

4. Completely agree. It's time for community content to go beyond the PC and hit consoles. With this new generation of consoles, there's no reason why we won't see user mods/content on consoles.

5. Totally agree again, and if MS wants a lock on something, they need to secure someone for some exclusives in this market, and allow keyboard/mouse, or a similiar peripheral device setup, on the 360. Will Wright bandied around the idea of console versions of Spore - lock him into an exclusive title as well, and you've got a killer app, with the right freedom of control.

6. Heh, the only way MS can actually follow through with this to the limit they want is if Miyamoto cashes one of those blank checks they've given him. Or, if they lockdown some unknown who has a need to create genre-breaking titles that have broad appeal and simplicity.

7. I'm not a huge fan of the Core/Premium myself, mainly due to the fact that alot of customers are turned off by it, in our store at least. It's a harder sell, but it makes the Premium look like gold.

8. Games for Windows makes sense in more than just a marketing point of view. Who doesn't have a desktop computer these days? If MS can back point #5 or #6, and then have it be Windows exclusive, they're going to help boost the hardware industry a hell of alot more as well. Make something with the addictive feel and 'pickup and play' qualities of Minesweeper or Solitaire, give it the intensity of something like Halo, and allow user mods, point #8 will become more prevalent in thier scheme.



Overall, I can agree with alot of Peter Moores' points, but mainly because it's things everyone has known for a long time. You need to expand an industry to keep it alive, and the whole 'games for windows' point is basically saying 'utilize an installed base'. I hope some of these come to fruition, because, as always, I would love to see more industry expansion (because I'll also remain employed, as well)!

[TrackZero]

Dan Shoe can eat a dick.

Errr....what does Dan Hsu (http://egmshoe.1up.com/) have to do with this article? Or are you just mentally associating to him over a single interview with Moore all that time ago?

[antoniogaud]

Man I see the X360 following the path of the ill fated Dreamcast :( Where is my killer app..hopefully this november in the vien of gears of ward :)
I hope that Microsoft can secure some games that have been named exclusives for the PS3:
Devil May Cry 4
Fatal Inertia
Virtual Fighter 5
Final Fantasy XIII
Final Fantasy Versu XIII
Warhawk
Lair
Hevenly Sword
Ridge Racer 7
MGS4

This is a joke right? Have you played GRAW, OBLIVION or CALL OF DUTY 2? Man there are so many great games for X360 that I consider it my favorite gaming console of all time AND I'VE OWNED THE ALL SINCE FAIRCHILD!!!

You are obviously joking in your post since.
- WARHAWK seems average at best
- Nobody knows what LAIR gameplay looks like
- RIDGE RACER 7... Mediocre series and what about Ridge Racer 6 X360?
- FATAL INERTIA seems average
- FFs and MGS4 wont be out for YEARS

I dont even know why I bothered to reply to your post - its obvious if they released Poo the Bathroom Adventure for the PS3 that you would consider it a killer app.

-sigh-

[Xenkylm]

What MS has achieved DEFINES their console so far.

Absolutely. In terms of what each console is (in theory) bringing to the table:

Nintendo: New gameplay/ LOCAL community involvement (party games)
XBox360: Advanced visuals / Immense community involvement (via Live)
PS3: Super-Advanced Visuals (by 2nd Gen?) / Functional Ubiquity in the Family room

I think it's not too hard to stratify the field here. XBox is at the top of the online pyramid, and Nintendo an PS3 share the bottom (or Nintendo owns it, if friend codes are the only way of getting games going). PS3 owns the cinema-quality visuals, assuming all goes well, otherwise they share it with XBox360. Nintendo owns the "unique gameplay," but shares it with PS3 if they didn't get the pointer right (seems unlikely)...

And Sandbox games are a huge deal, but from what I hear moreso in the US than in Japan, so is it possible that some of Peter Moore's suggestions are US-centric (would make sense, given the local appeal of the XBox 360)

[NeoSuplex]

Some of this stuff seems like blowing smoke, especially the points on User Created Content that MS loves to bring up. The fact is, they have the tools and capability to do much of this with the 360 right now. The 360 has a hard drive. The 360 has an ability to patch it's games. All they need to do is provide access to SDKs and the like for their games and others are sure to follow suit. Past that, there are already ways for people to transfer the files from PC to 360 even if they don't decide to make it possible to download User Content Direct to the 360.

Then there's point 8 which seems to me to be a shameless Vista plug. Windows is already considered a very viable game platform. Furthermore, it's a platform that already has most of the 'Epic Seven' realized. Maybe I'm missing something that made it all click since I didn't read/hear the actual presentation, but I don't see what this point was here for.

Consoles should really look up to PC as a game platform. Naturaly, MS has the best position to make this a reality. As long as consoles remain uniform in their capabilities (which this new Core/Premium Model used by MS and Sony damages IMHO) and avoid Mouse/Keyboard reliance, consoles can still keep their identities.

[Jack B]

Ah, som3 n3ws that its not n3ws, or just 3vil Avatar is trying to mak3 the ps3 sound lik3 the shitty gam3 consol3, this fuck3r is bann3d, for bi3ng a fuck3r.
H3ar me now, the ps3 is just 3 months away, so have Fun whil3 you 360 fans hav3 th3 chanc3, becaus3 the 360 is d3ad b3for3 you know it...
Chang3 is officialy Bann3d

Am I glad you don't have a can of spray paint or you'd probably tag the Evil Avatar site. You can't be banned soon enough.

[Magnanimous Gnome]

Uhu hu... secretly a majority of Nintendo stock has already been bought by Microsoft. :D

Not true. ;) Hiroshi Yamauchi or whatever his name his (the former Nintendo head) owns most of the company's stock.


Yes you are officially BANNED.

http://www.evilavatar.com/images/thumbs/banhammer.jpg


Oh, thank you bap! The banhammer makes my loins quiver. :cool:

[Magnanimous Gnome]

I'm afraid that MS is going to try to get more money out of the PC gaming market by either trying to charge some sort of fee for games released (to use DirectX as an example) or by charging a fee to use Windows (the original plan for Vista back when it was still Longhorn.) Point 8 and other comments from them seem to emphasize this. MS barely supports the PC platform these days - so all this talk about improving gaming on the platform seems like smoke and mirrors to me.

[bapenguin]

I'm afraid that MS is going to try to get more money out of the PC gaming market by either trying to charge some sort of fee for games released (to use DirectX as an example) or by charging a fee to use Windows (the original plan for Vista back when it was still Longhorn.) Point 8 and other comments from them seem to emphasize this. MS barely supports the PC platform these days - so all this talk about improving gaming on the platform seems like smoke and mirrors to me.

Live Anywhere.

They'd never get away for charging to use their API. Not after it's been free for 10+ years.

[thecrazyd]

This is a joke right? Have you played GRAW, OBLIVION or CALL OF DUTY 2?
Yeah, on my PC.
Live Anywhere.

They'd never get away for charging to use their API. Not after it's been free for 10+ years.
I can't believe you seriously think people will pay for multiplayer on the PC. This will bomb so bad. The only way I could see it being even a little of a success is if they allow a free and a paid version, and add some extra features for paid subscribers. Otherwise, no way. Multiplayer gaming has also been free for 10+ years.

[MoJoBehaumat]

Yeah, on my PC.

I can't believe you seriously think people will pay for multiplayer on the PC. This will bomb so bad. The only way I could see it being even a little of a success is if they allow a free and a paid version, and add some extra features for paid subscribers. Otherwise, no way. Multiplayer gaming has also been free for 10+ years.

WTF?
WOW anyone?

[Magnanimous Gnome]

Live Anywhere.

They'd never get away for charging to use their API. Not after it's been free for 10+ years.


Oh you never know. People buy a lot of things off of Live Arcade that I never thought they would. :p



Edit - On that same note, do you really think that PC gamers will pay to play online games with Live Anywhere? I really can't see that one happening.

[Magnanimous Gnome]

WTF?
WOW anyone?


CrazyD beat me to it on the last post. That said...


Paying for WoW is NOT what people are talking about here. 360 owners pay to play EVERY game on Live - 99% of the PC's online games are totally free to play.

Hell you have to pay an extra charge to play MMORPGs on the 360 above and beyond what you already pay for Live.

The point is that PC gamers are not going to start signing up in droves to pay for something that they have right now for free.

[MoJoBehaumat]

Exactly :)
Why pay for the service when you can milk your own tits? :confused:

[Sl1pstream]

Why pay for a dentist when you can pull out your own teeth?

[thecrazyd]

Why pay for a dentist when you can pull out your own teeth?
Not an apt comparison. More like, why pay for a dentist when you know another just as qualified dentist who will do it for free?

[GWhite]

Not an apt comparison. More like, why pay for a dentist when you know another just as qualified dentist who will do it for free?

I don't think that a paid service would fly either.

That said, having each game provide it's own connectivity interface is not nearly as nice as having one overarching and interconnected service for all of one's installed games.

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that Microsoft may start requiring or at least heavily encouraging the use of the Live! APIs for all Windows games. Gamecards will start reflecting PC usage and other xbox only drose like achievments may start appearing as well.

Hell, I doubt I'm going out on a limb at all.

[Xenkylm]

I don't think that a paid service would fly either.

That said, having each game provide it's own connectivity interface is not nearly as nice as having one overarching and interconnected service for all of one's installed games.

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that Microsoft may start requiring or at least heavily encouraging the use of the Live! APIs for all Windows games. Gamecards will start reflecting PC usage and other xbox only drose like achievments may start appearing as well.

Hell, I doubt I'm going out on a limb at all.

But then microsoft would be completely negating the benefit of having an Xbox. You can already get a lot of the same games on PC... they want you to have a reason to get an Xbox, and duplicating the things that make it special would hurt them overall.

I would imagine that they'll keep some Live features as xbox exclusives until console sales have tapered off in a few years. Certainly until well after the PS3 comes out.

[thecrazyd]

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that Microsoft may start requiring or at least heavily encouraging the use of the Live! APIs for all Windows games. Gamecards will start reflecting PC usage and other xbox only drose like achievments may start appearing as well.

Hell, I doubt I'm going out on a limb at all.
They can try it, but the games that require it will either recieve player made work-arounds, or will just totally flop.

[benjabean]

I never thought I'd be a Xbox owner, but here I am playing Chromehounds with my squadmates at 3 in the morning.

The sad truth of it is that the only systems I am getting any play time out of anymore are my 360 and my DSlite. So this whole debacle over Sony vs MS is just, well... lame.

Both Consoles have legitimate exclusives, but for the most part they are going to be drowning in their own mediocre ports. What you are going to see this coming year are a few key 360 exclusives (like, Gears of War) vs. a few key PS3 exclusives (like, MGS4), and everything else (like, GTA4, and RE5) are going to be sleeping around with everyone. You know why? The game companies make more money. With potential donwgrades in the Cell to a (rumored mind you) 2.? Ghz we are going to see the 360 and the PS3 looking much much similar.

Besides this all of this; as much as I LOVE the console market they have always lagged behind PCs. Again mind that the frontline of PCs are only embedded with Early Adopters, but it is a fair compass to say that where PCs go, Console will eventually go. And what is up-and-coming for PCs? Physics. The leaps and bounds that are going to occur in the way of physics are going to be the true next gen.

The next gen we are going to consume are just going to have a heavier layer of glossy paint.

So when you boil it down you can choose from two equal systems; except one of which will cost 600 bucks and whose games could range from 60-100 dollars.

I'm going to get a PS3, eventually, but lets not wax nostalgic about our favorite franchises. Everything this gen is going to get a little bit of everything. Neither the 360 or PS3 are going to be loaded with 3rd party exclusives. If you believe otherwise that either one will be a bastion of heavenly gaming, dream on.

[benjabean]

Gah...

Ok about Live!

I love it and I hate it.

It would be MORE useful if microsoft used their own damn servers for it.

Chromehounds users should not be playing on Japanese servers a month after the games release. The servers are a complete mess. Live has a great set up. You get online and bam you are greeted by your friends list; which doesnt seem like much, but from a PC gamers point of view it is nice to have everything integrated into one package. I dont have to jump from TS to Vent or from MSN to AIM to xFire to whatever other 50 million plus programs are out there.

I like being able to meet, keep in contact and chat, and invite any of my squadmates to a game. I simply think that if you are paying live you should HAVE to pay any othe rmonthly fees. FFXI is ridiculous. You shouldnt have to pay for live and a subscription to that.

I love being able to DL demos of games; which is nothing new to the PC market, but its pretty bomb to be playing NintyNineNights and Dead Rising a week before they come out. Heck, I dont have to rent Saints Row cause I already know it sucks from the demo!

All in all 50 bucks for a 13month subscription to Live! is pretty damn cheap when you break it down anyway.

[Ted Huge]

Online distribution of games probably can't come fast enough. Saving on marketing and paying graft to brick and mortar stores will definitely help developers receive more of the dollars we put into gaming. . . unfortunately for publishers, it will also mean that they do not get to have as much leverage in cooking the books in their favor.


Not only does it get more dollars in the pockets it ought to, online distribution also solves a major ethical dilemna (while creating a moral one). The developer needs to have a distribution model that will get its games in the hands of its target market. The larger the market, the better the deal for the dev. However, as anyone who has worked on a maturely-themed title will probably complain about, the brick and mortar reps will also refuse content outright. If they feel that a game is too violent, too overtly sexual, or too profane, they simply won't carry it in any of their stores. Walmart has a seat at creative team meetings of dev studios across the continent, and the first thing they do when they pull up their chair is drop a pair of handcuffs on the table in front of them.

An online distribution model allows developers to make the games that they want to make, not the ones that are as close to what they want to make as their distributors feel comfortable with.

[51|RandoM]

This is a joke right? Have you played GRAW, OBLIVION or CALL OF DUTY 2? Man there are so many great games for X360 that I consider it my favorite gaming console of all time AND I'VE OWNED THE ALL SINCE FAIRCHILD!!!


The man might have a PC. In that case, you might want to talk about the great 360 games other than the three you mentioned. I guess I could give you a bye on GRAW, since the two versions are somewhat different.

I can see considering the 360 as your favorite hardware of all time, but it isn't even close to what should be your favorite software library of all time. Plenty of time for that to happen though.

[51|RandoM]

WTF?
WOW anyone?

WoW is a game.

Live is a matchmaking service with perks, most of which are considered standard in the PC world, and free, I might add. People with a microsoft console have to pay for live if they want multiplayer gaming, it isn't like they can go with some alternative package.

[51|RandoM]

Gah...
I dont have to jump from TS to Vent or from MSN to AIM to xFire to whatever other 50 million plus programs are out there.

All in all 50 bucks for a 13month subscription to Live! is pretty damn cheap when you break it down anyway.

The problem isn't that such isn't available on PC, it is that since people have a choice on PC, they exercise that choice and you end up with people on 3+ different matchmaking/im/chat services.

You're actually happy to pay to have no choice, which is kind of funny when you think about it. :-)

[RevGored]

The problem isn't that such isn't available on PC, it is that since people have a choice on PC, they exercise that choice and you end up with people on 3+ different matchmaking/im/chat services.

You're actually happy to pay to have no choice, which is kind of funny when you think about it. :-)

haha, you're one of those guys. You think that because a console manufacturer makes a console they're not going to 'monopolize' thier own matchmaking service? Are you on drugs? The impetus of the console industry is the survival of the console manufacturer, TO the console manufacturer. Saying 'Hey Gamespy/Raven/Gamehound/matchmaking service, take over for us so we can't charge for services!' doesn't exactly work.

The PC isn't the personal Lord and Saviour of gaming man, so stop trying to evangelise. PC grognards are just as bad as console fanboys, if not moreso, because they also have this ability to staunchly cling to dead ideas like command based OS'es and setting thier own IRQ's for every game, pining for the 'good old days' just because you got your hands dirty resetting Files and Buffers in the autoexec.bat and config.sys everytime you wanted to play an Origin game. I should know, I'm one of them, and I'm positive that the kids I work with can't stand hearing about that banal, stupid bullshit.

In that, how hard is it for people to realize that we're going into an era of a seperate peace between consoles and PC gaming? GRAW was semi-fucking terrible on PC, and amazing on 360, whereas the opposite stands for Oblivion. Now can we just get along, or at least shutup with baseless opinion rising from our need to connect to some nonexistant roots in a goddamned HOBBY?

[Magnanimous Gnome]

blah blah freakin' blah



Did you even read his post? The guy was supporting Live. He wasn't some PC grognard going on and on about how great it is. Christ - this site lately is just fucking ridiculous.

[bean19]

Not only does it get more dollars in the pockets it ought to, online distribution also solves a major ethical dilemna (while creating a moral one). The developer needs to have a distribution model that will get its games in the hands of its target market. The larger the market, the better the deal for the dev. However, as anyone who has worked on a maturely-themed title will probably complain about, the brick and mortar reps will also refuse content outright. If they feel that a game is too violent, too overtly sexual, or too profane, they simply won't carry it in any of their stores. Walmart has a seat at creative team meetings of dev studios across the continent, and the first thing they do when they pull up their chair is drop a pair of handcuffs on the table in front of them.

An online distribution model allows developers to make the games that they want to make, not the ones that are as close to what they want to make as their distributors feel comfortable with.

Really great point. :)

Actually among many great points in this thread. I've actualy had games worth playing and have been completing work on some projects of my own so I totally didn't read this thread in a timely fashion.

Anyway, without going more into anything. I appreciate those of you who actually continued such a good discussion instead of having the retarded console war conversation that the original post seemed to encourage. . . Bait that some people took readily.