The 13 Steps to Sony's Demise [Archive]

JazGalaxy

11-13-2005, 12:45 PM

I was just reading The History of Videogames, and it's funny how that book basically reads like one giant fortune cookie message fortelling Sony's demise. The book is completely objective, but in it's objectiveness it really highlights exactly what's wrong with Sony, that being that there is nothing RIGHT with Sony. They got where they are purely by chance, and it's as though they don't realize it. Nintendo was working against themselves (N64 games that cost nearly twice what PS games cost for starters) and Sega basically commited suicide right on the world stage.

Sony has been, with no real first party licenses to speak of and no real unique contributions into the gaming culture (no unique controllers, no xbox live type services) simply subsisting on the fact that people want to play games. They're not MAKING anyone want to play games, and that is exactly what caused the videogame crash in the 80's. Too much of the same game presented too often with no real quality checks in motion. Doesn't that sound like the PS2 library to anyone? Of course PS2 has lots of Shadow of the Collosus, and Katamari Damacis... but with no quality control instituted every single one of those games is surrounded by poor knock offs of GTA and Resident Evil. It makes the average consumer who can't distinguish the good from the bad seek entertainment elsewhere.

SO, yeah, I really don't see why anyone would think the PS3 has a lock on this generation. With the same basic system as the PS2, with better graphics, and a lineup consisting almost purely of sequels, if the PS3 was the only system in this coming generation, I think we would see a massive bubble as soon as it was released followed by a crash as soon as people got used to the graphics.

Graphics can pull people in, but it can't make them stay. It's like Sony doesn't realize that it can't be content to cater to 18-30 year olds who have tons of money to spend and grew up in the habit of spending it on gaming, because as soon as those people move on... they've done absoutely nothing to create new gamers.

kickmybum

11-13-2005, 12:48 PM

This prediction sounds about right. Doesn't Sony have exclusive writes to the GTA series? That should be worth something.

Player 1

11-13-2005, 12:55 PM

Whether all the points are on or not are questionable, but it's a good read. It's food for thought.

We'll know whether the points were on in about 3 years. Maybe more.

As for the rest, yes, it might be nice fuel to someone's fire / propaganda / hate campaign but is "some website speculates about next gen" really front page news?

what's wrong with Sony, that being that there is nothing RIGHT with Sony. They got where they are purely by chance,

Wow. Pretty lucky for a company to accidentally find themselves on top of a multi-billion dollar global industry with their first serious product. All chance you say? Sure.

Sony did what MS are doing a little of now: they laid out the red carpet to developers. Their support and approach was amazing. Their network, support, seminars, tools, cohesiveness and overall INTEREST in 3rd parties was a total breath of fresh air. You get developers, you're going to increase those 'chances' of having some killer-app products like Ridge Racer, MGS, Final Fantasy - and, of course, the current golden ticket that is GTA.

MS's developer support is pretty good too - and you can see that they're going after the developers (in particular in Japan) like crazy. People don't by a Sony or Nintendo or MS box just to have a box. They buy it to play games. If you can increase the 'chances' of making your box be the favoured one by having those killer app games then, frankly, you're not as blindly lucky as some people would have you believe.

Borys

11-13-2005, 12:56 PM

A lot of things could happen but this is just grasping at straws.

MelFet Wart

11-13-2005, 12:57 PM

Actually... the time line does not start in the future, but in the past. The discussion of Nintendo's sales dropping because of developing the Revolution have already happened. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4319364.stm. just thought I'd point that out. :)

51|RandoM

11-13-2005, 12:59 PM

WOW is that guy confused. He thinks the PSP is competing with the video iPod? And that Nintendo's profits will go down in the near future because of Revolution development.

The PSP is competing with the video ipod. The only real draw of the PSP right now is as a mediaplayer or as an emulator. The TV thing they're doing with itunes and the video ipod? Easily done with a PSP too. One thing to note, if the video ipod has enough processing power to decode video, it has enough to start making some real games for. You'll have to come up with games that can deal with a limited control scheme, but it is definitely possible.

Nintendo's profits will go down, directly and indirectly because of Revolution development. Just by saying 'revolution development' everybody knows the gamecube is nearing its end. People who might have bought one now might wait instead, etc. FYI, the revolution development isn't done yet. Hell, have you even been able to find a complete and accurate hardware spec, much less a packaged devkit?

In regards to the article, I think he should've clarified his stance as the downfall of sony's console division, not sony itself. Introducing a console harder to develop for, and doing it at least six months after the competition is a fairly uphill battle---unless you're facing sega and the dreamcast /chuckle.

NACIONAL

11-13-2005, 01:09 PM

I was just reading The History of Videogames, and it's funny how that book basically reads like one giant fortune cookie message fortelling Sony's demise.

... they've done absoutely nothing to create new gamers.

You could have changed the words PS3 with Xbox360, and Sony for Microsoft and everything could be applied almost equal...

seriously... we don't really know what is going to happen in the end.

Kelegacy

11-13-2005, 01:18 PM

Did Red Cloak register a new alias?

Morratut

11-13-2005, 01:24 PM

I don't want this to happen. I'm a Xbox fanboy but i don't want MS to dominate the gaming arena. I want a 50/50 split.

I predict this gen...

Sony to have 45%
MS to have 40%
Nintendo to have 15%

/sigh who knows :rolleyes: i don't care as long as one company doesn't dominate.

Leaving Hope

11-13-2005, 01:26 PM

This prediction sounds about right. Doesn't Sony have exclusive writes to the GTA series? That should be worth something.

Yes, but Grand Theft Auto isn't the golden egg it used to be. Some GTA games have been banned in other countries (Japan, included), and less copies were sold of San Andreas than expected because of the Hot Coffee debacle.

Still, I think you have a valid point. One strong title can really boost sales for a console. Look at Halo. Sony has strong franchises in GTA, Metal Gear Solid, and Final Fantasy, games that are traditionally exclusives for a significant period of time.

Whether these exclusives (which may not remain exclusive) help cover the astronomical costs of developing the PS3 remains to be seen.

Magnanimous Gnome

11-13-2005, 01:27 PM

Leaving Hope

11-13-2005, 01:31 PM

People who might have bought one [Gamecube] now might wait instead, etc.

I agree that the Gamecube is pretty much reached the end of its lifetime. I haven't used it since Resident Evil 4.

However, if they bring the next Zelda out on Cube as they've promised, I think they might get some more sales. There's always the possibility of people waiting to play Zelda with the possibly backward compatible Revolution, but since Revolution is so far off people might just plop down $125 to play Zelda on the Cube. As long as its not a Wind Waker, Zelda's definitely worth $125 for me.

Nameback

11-13-2005, 01:37 PM

This prediction sounds about right. Doesn't Sony have exclusive writes to the GTA series? That should be worth something.

Well last time I checked they had exclusive rights, but I know their contract was running/had run out soon.

motorhappy

11-13-2005, 01:49 PM

The videogame market will only continue to grow if it diversifies. Reaching constantly to the same market of 18-30 year old boys, as someone pointed out above, will only serve to stagnate growth in the long run.

Just to expound on your point. The thing about geeks is that we all think we know what we want, and we'll argue about it for a long time, but the stuff that we tend to like the best comes at us sideways and surprises us. We don't necessarily have to praise or support the most inventive company before the fact, but we can at least reserve judgement.

Tronikx

11-13-2005, 01:53 PM

I was around when this next generation console war began... I was there when the console wars was between atari|colecovision|intellivision

The same thing is going to happen that ALWAYS happens.. just a few slight alterations which are common sense.

SONY:Same thing as always bringing new games to the market, which is what it has always done. The PS1 was an amazing machine with a ton of great games and the PS2 took over right were the PS1 left off and just kept rolling foreward. The PS3 will do the same and more games,better graphics,and better options.

XBOX:I always rooted for the Xbox, but thier games were always something to be desired... OR they came out very very late after a titles initial launch.Also I dont like the controlers on the Xbox. But I think the new system has a much better chance then before. The launch list for the new xbox is far more impressive then the one for the orginal. But hey.. every company has to learn the ropes, and I think MS did and are ready to get thier hands dirty now.

NINTENDO: Im a huge fan all the way up to the 64 (I think the 64 sucked minus mario 64) Nintendo does soemthing that bugs the shit out of me with every new launch... they rehash old games... How many mario titles do we need? How many more zeldas (love zelda dont get me wrong just alot of the titles sucked) do we need? Another mario party,mario kart,zelda, etc the list goes on... I love all the old nes games, and Metroid has owned my soul for many a year I still play it on my PC with an emulator but I think they better get some new and more impressive titles out there if they want thier boat to stay afloat..

SOOOO

PS3 : Same as before leading the pack
XBOX:Better then before due to alot of kins worked out and better titles,right on sonys heels this time
NINTENDO:who cares.. bring back my sega systems damnitt...

Opty

11-13-2005, 02:04 PM

The Iron Weasel

11-13-2005, 02:06 PM

Did Red Cloak register a new alias?

Its very possible, considering we all know to ignore Red Cloak, and his Anti-Sony propiganda. Maybe he felt a new alias, a fresh start would make us pay more attention.

jwbxx

11-13-2005, 02:25 PM

I think Nintendo has the most pressure to deliver this time. The GC was a pretty weak console for non fan boys. Xbox is clawing its way into the number 2 system in america, if nintendo lets xbox get a foothold on the number 2 spot, that cant be good for nintendo. People will say that nintendo is doing great in Japan, well of course nintendo is pretty much on the Japanse flag, they are Japan. The problem is they need to focus more on the american market because every quarter they are losing more and more market share to xbox, which is focusing on the american gamer.

So far we've seen things we want for the 360, things we want for the ps3, but for the revolution. We have seen backwards compatibility that anyone can do for free with roms and we have seen a controller that's like a remote control, nothing that makes me want to jump up and go reserve my revolution.

Like when I saw mario 64 for the N64 I dropped what I was doing and went and reserved that shit. I think nintendo is losing its non fan boy supporters and that's bad.

I love nintendo, the nes and gameboy were my first video games I have really played. I loved nes, snes and N64, and I just thought GC was pretty weak. I hope that the revolution can turn things around and put nintendo back into its former glory.

Borys

11-13-2005, 03:05 PM

Did Red Cloak register a new alias?

Who is this RC guy and how did I miss him?

The Iron Weasel

11-13-2005, 03:13 PM

Red Cloak is J. Allard, and he posts all this Anti-Sony, Pro-Microsoft stuff.

Kelegacy

11-13-2005, 03:16 PM

Who is this RC guy and how did I miss him?
Basically he is the antithesis of you. He has a website, or should, called SonySatan.com He drives a lime-green hatchback, too.

iamhurtin

11-13-2005, 03:28 PM

how could any console with Metal Gear Solid and Gran Tourismo fail

kickmybum

11-13-2005, 03:44 PM

Red Cloak is J. Allard, and he posts all this Anti-Sony, Pro-Microsoft stuff.

Who's the biggest Sony fanboy on EvilAvatar that posts against him?

eatme

11-13-2005, 03:53 PM

The same thing is going to happen that ALWAYS happens.

Agreed. The market leader has always changed every 1-2 generations. So, clearly, the market leader will change this generation.

thecrazyd

11-13-2005, 04:13 PM

Agreed. The market leader has always changed every 1-2 generations. So, clearly, the market leader will change this generation.
If you honestly believe that, then you are stupid.

51|RandoM

11-13-2005, 04:14 PM

I just don't see microsoft taking japan. They'll call on Godzilla before that happens, mark my words.

Royal Fool

11-13-2005, 04:18 PM

The "Nintendo rehashes" comment always confuses me, because people act like Nintendo's the only one who milks properties. I mean, Sony's milked Ratchet and Clank, Zak and Daxter, and Sly Cooper to death. There's already more than 15 games (existing and announced) combined between the three of those properties. Is it just because people roll up all of Nintendo's previous Mario whoring into one big ball whereas Sony's done all of theirs in a 5 year span, so Nintendo's seems larger by comparison?

I hate being an ass, but I'll just point out that I can only count 12 among those 3 franchises...

- Ratchet & Clank 1, 2 and 3 and now Deadlocked
- Sly Cooper 1, 2 and 3
- Jak & Daxter 1, 2 and 3 and now Jak X (Along with Daxter for PSP)

That's only 12... but you're right, it's a lot of milking. You can also combine that with all the EyeToy games, the Singstar games and the up-and-coming Buzz! quiz game franchise... what has the GameCube had? Well, a bit...

- Mario Sunshine
- 4 Mario Party games
- Mario Kart
- Mario Golf
- Mario Tennis
- Mario Baseball
- Paper Mario
- Mario Strikers

But those games simply touch upon a variety of genres. They are hardly 'milking' the genres themselves (Except for Mario Party, hehe), only the Mario property. Big difference.

Neverborne

11-13-2005, 05:49 PM

Nintendo does soemthing that bugs the shit out of me with every new launch... they rehash old games... How many mario titles do we need? How many more zeldas (love zelda dont get me wrong just alot of the titles sucked) do we need? Another mario party,mario kart,zelda, etc the list goes

Let's see, here. What could be a good counter-arguement? Oh, I don't know.

How about...Final Fantasy fucking 12.

grammatoncleric

11-13-2005, 06:24 PM

If you honestly believe that, then you are stupid.

How is that assessment stupid? The video game market has been around for about 30 years, and we've had 3 market leaders. Roughly every ten years the leader changed, and I don't see why that can't happen again. That isn't to say it WILL happen, but it's hardly stupid to predict the future on past market trends.

Kelegacy

11-13-2005, 06:26 PM

I hate being an ass, but I'll just point out that I can only count 12 among those 3 franchises...

- Ratchet & Clank 1, 2 and 3 and now Deadlocked
- Sly Cooper 1, 2 and 3
- Jak & Daxter 1, 2 and 3 and now Jak X (Along with Daxter for PSP)

That's only 12... but you're right, it's a lot of milking. You can also combine that with all the EyeToy games, the Singstar games and the up-and-coming Buzz! quiz game franchise... what has the GameCube had? Well, a bit...

- Mario Sunshine
- 4 Mario Party games
- Mario Kart
- Mario Golf
- Mario Tennis
- Mario Baseball
- Paper Mario
- Mario Strikers

But those games simply touch upon a variety of genres. They are hardly 'milking' the genres themselves (Except for Mario Party, hehe), only the Mario property. Big difference.

To their defense, the Ratchet, Sly and Jak series have not lost any shine in their "milking" incarnations. Jak racing even got decent reviews, and Deadlocked has been getting great love as well. The only thing I hated about those 3 series is that Jak 2 took such a detour from the first game that I lost interest. The first was bright, vibrant, and a ton of innocent fun. Then they went all dark and mature with it. Still, the platforming elements of 2 were great, but the car-jacking racing portions hurt my soul. But Ratchet and Sly...awesome. I can't get enough Ratchet (and Clank!), that's for sure.

crashedout

11-13-2005, 06:43 PM

If nintendo and sega can loose their lead then so can Sony. When MS picks market it tends to win, PDA's, office suites and OS's to name a few. They have some of the smartest and unique people in the world and as long as their cash cows hold up they don't give up. Given that Sony is loosing money in other divisions and their electronics arm keeps making boneheaded decisions (who need five proprietary memory formats) they may be in a weakened position. I hope for a 50/50 position to keep things fresh.

I think this article shows a possible outcome, just as possible is they pull a dreamcast and end up last. i thought article was worth the read.

LogainAblar

11-13-2005, 07:12 PM

I don't believe that MS will garner nearly enough support from Japan to beat out Sony, though I think it will certainly be much closer.

Thing is, Sony is just doing their typical tactic when threatened with a competitor who launches earlier: don't release much of anything except info designed to create the sense that their competitor's machine will not be on the same level as their own. It's a great market tactic, because by not divulging final specs/finalize gameplay footage, the consumers have no way to compare their competitor's console to Sony's, and thus Sonly simply has to let the consumers think themselves into waiting for Sony's machine.

The reason they don't release info anytime near their competitor's launch? So that consumers don't see how little difference their will be between early games. That is NOT to say that as devs utilitize the full power of the hardware there might not be dramatic differences between consoles, only that first-gen games of a console don't look spectacular, and I firmly believe that first impressions do make a difference to the average consumer.

I am not an MS fanboy; I am just pointing out a common Sony tactic, and it certainly works. I am not certain it will work this time, however, because MS can throw as much money as they want at their machine to keep it until at least the end of this generation.

As for Nintendo, I truly love many things about older Nintendo, but I just think that they are trying too hard to be different. I really like the concept of infrared sensors, but I hate the design of the remote. It looks more uncomfortable than Sony's batarang (I wish Sony would stick with the standard PS2 controller for the next-gen). Still, if it creates new ways to play games that I'm interested in, then I'm all for it. I just don't want to see a line of Mario Handjob titles on the shelves.

It's all about the software.

Balthasar

11-13-2005, 08:33 PM

Let's see, here. What could be a good counter-arguement? Oh, I don't know.

How about...Final Fantasy fucking 12.

That's actually an awful counter, because Sony does not make Final Fantasy games.

alienchild

11-13-2005, 09:47 PM

oh, and the first 6 Final Fantasy games was actually on Nintendo consoles :p

Player 1

11-14-2005, 12:19 AM

But those games simply touch upon a variety of genres. They are hardly 'milking' the genres themselves (Except for Mario Party, hehe), only the Mario property. Big difference.

Actually, a big difference is that no company crows about originality, revolution and defining genre's as much as Nintendo like to. They're also very happy to soak up all this talk of innovation.

See, I'd have a problem with Sony and MS if they kept on harping on about originality and revolution whilst spewing out remakes/rehashes and whoring their IP.

But they don't.

Big difference.

TKO

11-14-2005, 04:01 AM

Actually, a big difference is that no company crows about originality, revolution and defining genre's as much as Nintendo like to. They're also very happy to soak up all this talk of innovation.

See, I'd have a problem with Sony and MS if they kept on harping on about originality and revolution whilst spewing out remakes/rehashes and whoring their IP.

But they don't.

Big difference.
Well, all 3 are lying bastards, so I don't see why you might like to suggest MS or Sony are in some way less-bastard-like. All the nice companies got killed off already. Didn't you get the memo?

So if they want to be trully 'innovative' in your eyes, they must shun any form of remake, and embrace 'pure' innovation? A title should only be allowed out if there was nothing quite like it before? Yeah, that would be smart.

Nintendo are wise to their cash-cows. They know what a landmark Mario64 was. You might consider Mario Sunshine to be a simple milking of that formula, but consider this: I sat my 4 year old nephew in front of a Nintendo64 for the first time last week. You know what he keeps going back to time and time again? Mario64. I only had to *show* him the Mario Sunshine box and he flipped out.

And they get huge loyalty to stuff like Waverace, Zelda, Metroid, Mariokart, Mario Party, and F-Zero because there is nothing quite like them anywhere else. Hell, if Square hadn't jumped ship (but hey, who could blame them) you could put Final Fantasy on that list too. ..Why stop making them when people want them?

I would be sorely be disappointed to see the Waverace, Mariokart, or F-Zero franchises stop (yeah, I'm a racing whore), simply because there is nothing else quite like them out there.

And despite having these nice safe franchises, the company does impress me with the innovation I see them trying for with each new machine. (remember Pikmen? the NintendoDS? Nintendogs?) Sure, I wouldn't lose any sleep if the Mario character died a horrible death tomorrow. But I can see whey they keep him.

Footnote: If they weren't innovative, surely they would have built a PSP rather than a DS.

Player 1

11-14-2005, 05:10 AM

Well, all 3 are lying bastards, so I don't see why you might like to suggest MS or Sony are in some way less-bastard-like. All the nice companies got killed off already. Didn't you get the memo?

Ah. So, what you're implying is that one company's lies aren't as bad as another company's?

I'm sorry, that's the only possible point I can derive from your statement other than the sarcasm.

So if they want to be trully 'innovative' in your eyes, they must shun any form of remake, and embrace 'pure' innovation? A title should only be allowed out if there was nothing quite like it before? Yeah, that would be smart.

Certainly not. But Nintendo appear to want their cake and eat it. "Listen to us - we give you originality" with one breath and then they release some more Mario Party or IP whoring stuff with the other.

Either they're consistently original, innovative, revolutionary and genre defining or they're not.

Make a choice and stick to it. I'm sick to death of Nintendo counter-points only working when the goal posts of the discussion get move with every response.

Nintendo are wise to their cash-cows. They know what a landmark Mario64 was.

It was? So how come, you know, historically and factually, it wasn't the first true 3D platformer of that generation? It's urban myth that people are believing. Just like "play it again Sam" is never in Casablanca even though people 'quote' it all the time.

Give me facts, not myth.

You might consider Mario Sunshine to be a simple milking of that formula, but consider this: I sat my 4 year old nephew in front of a Nintendo64 for the first time last week. You know what he keeps going back to time and time again? Mario64. I only had to *show* him the Mario Sunshine box and he flipped out.

I'm not too sure of what you're trying to say with that statement. I've attempted to interpret a number of way and, frankly, all of them are too absurd to be taken seriously.

..Why stop making them when people want them?

Oh dear. How naive. You think they make games because people want them? No. You make a product and tell people it's what they want. It's a big difference - and before you attempt to blow it out of the water - consider EA's products and their sales figures. Get my point?

And despite having these nice safe franchises, the company does impress me with the innovation I see them trying for with each new machine. (remember Pikmen? the NintendoDS? Nintendogs?)

Yep, I remember Pikman when it was called Lemmings. I remember Nintendogs when it was called Little Computer People. I remember the DS when I look at any palmtop with a stylus and Minesweeper on it in the last decade.

Who needs innovation when you have amnesia?

Footnote: If they weren't innovative, surely they would have built a PSP rather than a DS.

We'll see come next generation of handhelds. Innovation, to me, means a lasting improvement - like stereo instead of mono. If it doesn't last - it's a gimmick. I wonder what percentage of DS features will be retained in the next generation of handhelds? If we must compare it to the PSP then I wonder what percentage of PSP features will be retained.

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 07:08 AM

We'll know whether the points were on in about 3 years. Maybe more.

As for the rest, yes, it might be nice fuel to someone's fire / propaganda / hate campaign but is "some website speculates about next gen" really front page news?

Wow. Pretty lucky for a company to accidentally find themselves on top of a multi-billion dollar global industry with their first serious product. All chance you say? Sure.

Sony did what MS are doing a little of now: they laid out the red carpet to developers. Their support and approach was amazing. Their network, support, seminars, tools, cohesiveness and overall INTEREST in 3rd parties was a total breath of fresh air. You get developers, you're going to increase those 'chances' of having some killer-app products like Ridge Racer, MGS, Final Fantasy - and, of course, the current golden ticket that is GTA.

MS's developer support is pretty good too - and you can see that they're going after the developers (in particular in Japan) like crazy. People don't by a Sony or Nintendo or MS box just to have a box. They buy it to play games. If you can increase the 'chances' of making your box be the favoured one by having those killer app games then, frankly, you're not as blindly lucky as some people would have you believe.

I'm not sure where you get your facts, but they're not all straight. Sony wasn't some massive help for developers, in fact they were really quite a hinderance. Especially in the early days when they actually BANNED RPG'S from coming out on the PSX in america. It wasn't cooincidence that before FF7 the only RPGs were wild arms and Beyond the Beyond. Now it's their bread and butter. And if they are so great with developers why was it recorded in any number of periodicals, and even in a videogame history book, that it was EIGHTEEN MONTHS before a quality PS2 game was put on shelves. Before the Saturn killed itself, Sony was selling 1 playstation for ever FIVE Sega Saturn units.

If Sony was so great with developers, why did every single PSX title come out on Sega's Saturn as well as the PSX before Sega killed themselves? (Resident Evil, Tomb Raider etc.)

No... Sony won out purely by chance.

AniAko

11-14-2005, 07:11 AM

I would be happy to see Sony with a bloody nose. I've HATED the playstation from the very start, with a few exceptions of spectacular games, the console itself wasn't that impressive. Several revisions and an analog controller later, you have the common PSX, which paves the road for the PS2, WHICH IS A PSX WITH BETTER GRAPHICS. The PS2 has not excelled in anything other than the visual appearance of it's games, which I'll admit was for some reason the popular standpoint in console supremacy at the time. NOW, Big N is developing a new way to interact with games, and Microsoft is doing the same. Big N is developing a new innovative controller and microsoft is mastering the technique of minaturizing the world, and improving game experience through community driven ambitions. What's the PS3 doing? Price hiking for a boomerrang controller and a system fit to generate Dreamworks or Pixar style productions on the fly. Whoop-de-doo. True there are the die hard's that will shell out $1000 for the PS3, but will it be able to compete? What will it bring to the table?

I like a handful of playstation games, they are in my mind legendary, but that doesn't define the console. Sony's a cold-hearted company, and they'll make you re-mortgage your home if they knew you'd pay such a high price for their product.

I appologize to any Sony die-hards out there, I'm not attacking you or your views, just the simple truth that Sony got lucky, and if they don't change their tune, they won't get lucky again.

Taco

11-14-2005, 07:14 AM

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 07:14 AM

I really think that Nintendo has the right idea with trying to create a niche in the market. I know people bash them for this, but I really don't see why. I guess some will bash the company for anything. The Nintendo in some ways is like the Mini Cooper or the VW beetle - it's quirky and fun and there is a whole market out there for something like that - a market that Ford and GM really don't cater to. Saying that the Revolution sucks because it isn't enough like the other systems is kind of like saying that the Mini Cooper sucks because it isn't enough like the Mustang. I'm guessing that somewhere on teh Internets there are forums where people say that exact thing.

The videogame market will only continue to grow if it diversifies. Reaching constantly to the same market of 18-30 year old boys, as someone pointed out above, will only serve to stagnate growth in the long run.

I don't think Nintendo is trying to create a Niche market at all. I think they're simply using the knowledge they gained in the past when they revitalized the gaming market in the 80's to revitalize the market now. I think they realize that the playstation gaming model isn't a one that's hinged on longterm success. Just like the Great Depression being started because farmers kept using the same land over and over again until it was used up, so was the videogame crash of the 80's started because developers kept using the same game design systems over and over again until they were used up. You literally had 50 version of pacman in arcades and people simply quit going. Nintendo sees, I think, that this is exactly what the playstation model of gaming is doing, and they are intentionally trying to distance themselves FROm that. Also reports are starting to come in that younger children are not interested in video games like we were growing up, and I think Nintendo knows exactly why this is. They are making a system that will capture the public like PacMan did. THAT'S the only thing that can jumpstart the industry.

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 07:18 AM

From everything I read the PS2 was pretty god awful for devs, the Xbox in comparison was good.

I think the 360 will be even better, who knows about the PS3, you'd like to think they learn from their mistakes. All you hear is about how hard it will be to develop for the Cell without some damn nice tools. Will Sony provide them?

The problem is that Sony doesn't see it's mistakes as mistakes, and why should it? It's the industry leader by a HUGE margin. But, then, this is exactly what, I think, will cause their demise. They're a young company (in the gaming sector) who thinks they have it figured out and they do not. the PS3 hardware that we've already seen will crash and burn if they don't do something else to add with it.

If the third party developers see greener pastures on X360, and they WILL see greener pastures on X360 because it's installed user base is going to be very very large by the time the PS3 launches... then it will get the third party games leaving Sony with nothing but it's nonexistant first party lineup.

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 07:22 AM

Goronmon

11-14-2005, 07:45 AM

It was? So how come, you know, historically and factually, it wasn't the first true 3D platformer of that generation? It's urban myth that people are believing. Just like "play it again Sam" is never in Casablanca even though people 'quote' it all the time.

Give me facts, not myth.
Don't be a dumbass, if you aren't sure of the definition of a word (like landmark for instance) at least attempt to look it up before you attempt to talk down to people.

I'm not too sure of what you're trying to say with that statement. I've attempted to interpret a number of way and, frankly, all of them are too absurd to be taken seriously.
Again, don't be a dumbass. The meaning was obvious. Name-recognition matters. His son was more excited seeing Mario on the box of Mario Sunshine because of his previous experience with Mario64 than if the main characters name was Bob the Plumber. Seriously, if you're unable to make simple inferences from someone's post, maybe message boards aren't the place for you.

Oh dear. How naive. You think they make games because people want them? No. You make a product and tell people it's what they want. It's a big difference - and before you attempt to blow it out of the water - consider EA's products and their sales figures. Get my point?
Man, I'd hate to have the outlook on gaming that you have. I mean, I for one look forward to every version of Zelda thats released. It'll be a said day when they stop making those I tell you. Most people like sequels, for the same reason people like television shows that are on-air for years.

Yep, I remember Pikman when it was called Lemmings. I remember Nintendogs when it was called Little Computer People. I remember the DS when I look at any palmtop with a stylus and Minesweeper on it in the last decade.

Who needs innovation when you have amnesia?
Either you haven't played Lemmings or you haven't played Pikmin. The DS is more innovative when compared to products like the PSP. Sure, Nintendo didn't create the use of the stylus, but saying that the DS is a glorified PDA is just being obtuse.

We'll see come next generation of handhelds. Innovation, to me, means a lasting improvement - like stereo instead of mono. If it doesn't last - it's a gimmick. I wonder what percentage of DS features will be retained in the next generation of handhelds? If we must compare it to the PSP then I wonder what percentage of PSP features will be retained.
This comparison would be valid if the PSP actually introduced new features to a handheld, which it didn't. I mean, seriously, the PSP looks like a smaller, prettier Game Gear that plays movies. Not only that, the PSP itself seems to be becoming more of a handheld multimedia player than a portable gaming system.

Nintendo may not be the most innovative company in existence, but when compared to Sony and Microsoft, they are definately a step above.

Anyways, from the tone of your post I get the feeling you don't even like games that much and/or you are just being a dambass on purpose, haha ;)

Taco

11-14-2005, 07:50 AM

Anyways, from the tone of your post I get the feeling you don't even like games that much and/or you are just being a dambass on purpose, hahap

Well there is a base level problem with how large gaming companies work in reguards to how the audience at EvAv would like to see them work. He's part of and/or supports this problem.

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 07:56 AM

Indeed.

Player1, why is it that you, apparently, associate reusing charachters from a series as a lack of innovation.

We've, in this thread, discussed Mario Party, Mario Strikers, Mario Golf, Mario Sunshine in others... Within those games we have... a video boardgame (new and innovative concept that is quite fun for me and my friends to play even at 22 years of age) an action arcade soccer game (which, while this isn't new, has not been seen on consoles in a very long time) a minature golf/real golf hybrid (which is pretty innovative and not at all a crowded genre on store shelves) and an extremely well done platform game with a water mechanic that is new and fun to use.

Sooooo.... I'm failing to see your argument. Having the same charachters in a game does not in any way make them similar. It just means you're looking at the same avatars and, frankly, many people find that to be a positive thing. When it comes to rehashing games, I'm sure people's LEAST used argument in that direction is that we're sick of seeing the same charachters. Rather, we're sick of seeing the same things even if it's new charachters doing it. Resident Evil got retarded regardless of the fact that it used new charachters in every game. RE4 went back and grabbed an OLD charachter, and it was by all accounts amazing.

So surely charachters, or IPs as you call them (becuase we're gamers and we have to sound as clinical as possible about playing games all day to make it sound like serious hard work!), have absolutely nothing to do with how innovative a game is.

AniAko

11-14-2005, 08:19 AM

What a wicked wicked web we weave.

I remember IDENTICAL conversations about the DS & PSP, The N64, and Playstation, the PS2, and gamecube. Sony the giant it is, ALWAYS rallies up its shock troopers and tries to play down the weak link. It's the way they work, but they're about to get hit by a tidal wave.

Sony's the school yard bully and Nintendo is the refined *SMART* and popular nerd. Like every bully, Sony will pick on Nintendo, and put it in headlocks in front of all Nintendo's friends (fans), and Sony's bully-friends (fans) will laugh and poke fun. The truth of the matter is, Nintendo makes tries to make sense and explain the situations, but the bullies don't listen. But soon Sony is about to meat it's match. XBox, the new kid on the school yard is popular, and tries to take the place of top of the pyrmid in social standings. Sony doesn't like it so they take on the XBox, and his new friends, and Nintendo is left alone. Meanwhile, Nintendo starts forming their own strategy of how to combat Sony. Xbox is fresh, and is the cool kid, and Sony can't let their crown be taken. So when Sony is defeated by Xbox it will resort to it's old ways of beating up on Nintendo, but by then Nintendo will have a strategy in place and be out of Sony's league (non-competing).

It doesn't matter what Nintendo has offered. The facts are in the numbers, playstation lovers are dying out in favor of Xbox. Nintendo is more like a side dish to the now expansive Xbox.

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 09:03 AM

agreed.

I like how people combat sony being THE MOST SHADY COMPANY AROUND by saying things like "everyone lies! all companies do it! blah blah blah!"

Well, sorry.. no they don't. Sony is the console manufacturer who's stats for the PS2 DWARFED the output stats of the other two far superior consoles because they posted theoretical data instead of real world numbers. Sony is the only company who reports it's sold consoles in terms of how many it delivers to stores instead of the industry accepted concept of sell-through, or "how many people actually BOUGHT the console". Sony is the only company convicted of payola schemes where they pay radio DJs with money and "favors" in order to have their songs spotlighted througout the day(which is illegal). Sony is the only company facing a class action suit for installing malware on people's computers. Sony is the only company that said that armed guards were needed to escort it's console because terrorist could use it to launch missles. Sony is the only console who said that it's PS2 hardware could render ToyStory.

The list goes on and on. They lie. They are shady liars.

Nintendo CERTAINLY does not do that.

Player 1

11-14-2005, 09:20 AM

Nintendo CERTAINLY does not do that.

Excuse me for my assumptions, but I'm going to assume that you're not an employee of Nintendo and have never been. I'm also going to assume you're not psychic and therefore are unable to read the minds of the head guys at Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo.

Now, unless you can prove my assumptions incorrect, I would like you to substantiate your claims.

Whilst your at it, Wonderboy, can you tell me if anyone I know has ever made a false claim or whether my boss is genuinely working on my project review? Your wisdom and insight would be an invaluable asset to me.

Or..

Are you just another guy talking out your ass?

This is why gamers piss me off so much. This god damn holier-than-thou attitude and talking like they actually have a clue. Admittedly, you may have an opinion. But a clue? God damn. You might have one if you could even comprehend how much you DON'T know.

You guys, they should do a sitcom about you. You're hilarious :p

Nintendo CERTAINLY does not do that.

They most certainly do and I can cite examples of times when shady lies by Nintendo have been at the cost of loyal consumers and gamers and developers.

Will I? I doubt it. I've already cited the examples and you guys don't like to hear it so you dismiss it as lies. So, nah, don't think I'll bother. Search my posts for 'em - they're there.

AniAko

11-14-2005, 09:25 AM

Interesting sidde note. I purchased a Famicom styled GBA SP, and it had a dead pixel. I was able to return it for a new one, no questions asked. I've also heard people return DS's without problems as well.

I understand and acknowledge that the dot-pitch margin of error goes up with the lower dotpitch. Sony understood this too. So instead of LOSE out on all the money the returned PSP's would generate because almost everyone has a dead pixel, they'd rather screw the consumer. They knew this problem going into it, and they didn't try to prepare their customer base until after the fact. Sony cares about Sony, hence the non-existant online structure game play.

Tennistoad

11-14-2005, 10:56 AM

Wow I can't believe people are not giving the 360 a chance at being #1. From just a developers standpoint and Live, It is already #1. The reason sony's ps2 is so huge is because sega couldn't get EA sports. If you could have gotten Madden and the other ea titles on the cheaper DC, then the ps2 wouldn't have been a must own @ 299 compared to 149 for the DC. It's gonna be hard for mom@dad to justify $400 for a ps3 with no game, when that xbox base system is sitting right next to it for $279(or cheaper) with a bundled game(poss pd0 or pgr3). and most games not exclusive.

Plus once someone plays over live against other real humans. Most of the time they don't want to go back to playing sp. And *** is really marketing smart this time. They are hitting the urban kids hard. Once these kids start putting 360's in their music and mtv shows...bam sony is 2nd.

Oh yeah, once they start pushing Gears of War hard you will see a huge system seller. I really believe that people who own ps2's are kinda bored of the sony titles and will want a change in the next gen.

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 10:57 AM

Excuse me for my assumptions, but I'm going to assume that you're not an employee of Nintendo and have never been. I'm also going to assume you're not psychic and therefore are unable to read the minds of the head guys at Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo.

Now, unless you can prove my assumptions incorrect, I would like you to substantiate your claims.

Whilst your at it, Wonderboy, can you tell me if anyone I know has ever made a false claim or whether my boss is genuinely working on my project review? Your wisdom and insight would be an invaluable asset to me.

Or..

Are you just another guy talking out your ass?

This is why gamers piss me off so much. This god damn holier-than-thou attitude and talking like they actually have a clue. Admittedly, you may have an opinion. But a clue? God damn. You might have one if you could even comprehend how much you DON'T know.

You guys, they should do a sitcom about you. You're hilarious :p

They most certainly do and I can cite examples of times when shady lies by Nintendo have been at the cost of loyal consumers and gamers and developers.

Will I? I doubt it. I've already cited the examples and you guys don't like to hear it so you dismiss it as lies. So, nah, don't think I'll bother. Search my posts for 'em - they're there.

what the heck are you talking about? Every case I stated is perfectly factual and not even remotely backhand information. It's featured prominently in most news gathering organizations from CNN to Gamespot. And don't you actually even READ EVIL AVATAR!?! They've been covering the root kit scandal to death...

http://bitdaemon.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=673

There. Proof.

Now what have you got on Nintedo, please. Or, what, are you going to post about how they singlehanded saved the Marlins baseball franchise based purely out of civic pride? Those jerks...
I

AniAko

11-14-2005, 11:12 AM

*Grabs a bucket of popcorn*
*Watches heated fanboy fight*

We're reporting news and opinions on the matters. We're not bashing fellow EA members because the color of their console is different than yours. Fanboy fights just lead to flaming and flooded forums with swearing extravaganzas.

I propose a debate. This will not be to prove a point, but rather, both parties can research the hell on both topics, and form an actual arguments instead of throwing conjectures back and forth. This can be done in a case and double rebuttle format, followed by a Q&A on each topic by the opposing team.

Magnanimous Gnome

11-14-2005, 01:25 PM

Are you just another guy talking out your ass?

This is why gamers piss me off so much. This god damn holier-than-thou attitude and talking like they actually have a clue. Admittedly, you may have an opinion. But a clue? God damn. You might have one if you could even comprehend how much you DON'T know.

Wow, hello Pot. :rolleyes:

Seriously guys, just stop replying to this asshat. This has to be at least the fifth thread on here in the last week wherein he's constantly tried to say that Nintendo is a worthless company that no one should like whatsoever. He claims to be unbiased, yet I never catch him doing the same thing to Sony or MS.

Now what have you got on Nintedo, please. Or, what, are you going to post about how they singlehanded saved the Marlins baseball franchise based purely out of civic pride? Those jerks...
I

No, he's going to bring up the shady things that the company did back in the late 80s and early 90s. You know, those things that are so revelant today. :rolleyes:

One more thing - the argument that Mario 64 isn't a landmark title simply because it wasn't the first 3D platformer is bunk. EVERYONE knows that the game wasn't the first 3D platformer, yet Player 1 and other anti-Nintendrones continue to put these words in people's mouths. I suppose that Baldur's Gate wasn't landmark either, because it certainly wasn't the first RPG. Same goes for Everquest, or Starcraft, or Halo. None of these games were landmark. Obviously the only landmark games are the VERY first ones in the genre, regardless of whether or not they were any good or even garnered one little bit of attention.

Praise to whoever refuted the silly Pikmin=Lemmings comment. Talk about uninformed "gamers."

JazGalaxy

11-14-2005, 01:59 PM

I'm full well not admitting to knowing that SuperMario64 was not the first fully 3D platforming adventure game. What else was there? I remember, before it, only 2.5D games like Clockwork Knight, Bug, and Pandemonium. What fully 3D game came out before Mario 64?

Taco

11-14-2005, 02:04 PM

This is why gamers piss me off so much. This god damn holier-than-thou attitude and talking like they actually have a clue. Admittedly, you may have an opinion. But a clue? God damn. You might have one if you could even comprehend how much you DON'T know.

What a paradox this statement is. I think my brain just exploded.

AniAko

11-14-2005, 02:10 PM

*Finishes popcorn and changes channels*

Magnanimous Gnome is right

Taco

11-14-2005, 02:14 PM

Seriously guys, just stop replying to this asshat.

This is why people named gnome piss me off so much. They swear to fucking much. Assholes.

NACIONAL

11-14-2005, 02:16 PM

. What fully 3D game came out before Mario 64?

Quake was the first fully 3d game...

Ohh you were talking about consoles?? mmmmm

Taco

11-14-2005, 02:19 PM

Tomb Raider.

AniAko

11-14-2005, 02:51 PM

Here's to your debate Found at wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_game)

Some of the earliest 3D platform games were released on the Sega Saturn: Clockwork Knight was released in December 1994 as a launch game in Japan (and subsequently as a launch game in the U.S.) While the game featured levels and boss characters rendered in 3D, it could be considered "2.5D" due to its 2D gameplay and the use of prerendered 2D sprites for regular characters, similar to Donkey Kong Country (the sequel improved upon this with some 3D effects such as hopping between the foreground and background, or the camera panning and curving around a corner). Bug!, another Saturn game that was released in 1996, used 3D level designs but restricted the player to set paths (which often went left-to-right more than front-to-back). Its characters were sprite-based (while the developer claimed that all characters were "rendered in glorious 3D"[1], a less misleading word would be "prerendered"). Another 3D platfomer was on the Sony PlayStation - Jumping Flash!, released in April 1995, was one of the earliest games for the system, and predated Super Mario 64 by over a year. The game used mostly 3D polygons and featured a first-person perspective.

Jumping Flash! is your first true free roam platformer, but it was in first person. Mario64 redefined what it was to be a 3D platformer, the first with camera control, free roam, objective, and interactive environments, according to the source.

Tombraider released in the US Sept 15, 1996
Mario64 released in the US Sept 26 1996 BUT

Mario64 released in JAPAN June 1996.

Anyone got a date on tombraider in Japan?

Fernie417

11-14-2005, 03:06 PM

Anyone got a date on tombraider in Japan?

It's more than likely after the American release since it was developed in English first.

And wow, I haven't seen the flames of a console war rise so high since the Saturn/Playstation/N64 era. Quite entertaining really. This should be on tv or something. ;)

TKO

11-14-2005, 05:29 PM

Ah. So, what you're implying is that one company's lies aren't as bad as another company's?
Nope.. You just seem to imply Nintendo are somehow dishonest as compared to MS and Sony. Which is quite laughable. I won't even site examples for those two, I'm sure y'all know them well enough.

Certainly not. But Nintendo appear to want their cake and eat it. "Listen to us - we give you originality" with one breath and then they release some more Mario Party or IP whoring stuff with the other.

Either they're consistently original, innovative, revolutionary and genre defining or they're not.
Hehe.. This the most pretentious bulls--t I ever heard. Like Chumbawumba can no longer consider themselves alternative because the released a 'mainstream' ambum. Or you can't be a Frank Zappa fan if you aren't listening to the original vinyl.

I don't ever recall Nintendo claiming to be *exclusively* innovative. Miyamoto merely claims to want to make *fun* games. And I tell ya, for the Gamecube, *fun* is having another version of Mariokart, a new Waverace, a new Zelda. That they make an actual effort to innovative with other titles and hardware too is a damn nice bonus. (Some might even call it: innovative!) :)

Either they're consistently original, innovative, revolutionary and genre defining or they're not.
Well gee: Be consistently original, innovative, etc.. Never capitalize/improve on our successes.. Discard ideas, even if they sell well.. Alienate our fans.. Ignore our commercial needs (ie: profit)...

Holy pretentious bulls--t batman! Why did they not do this? :D

It was? So how come, you know, historically and factually, it wasn't the first true 3D platformer of that generation?
Never said it was the first. I remember playing a 3d platformer on the Amiga long before this. (it was crap, of course) :) ..That Nindendo were able to polish the 3d platformer, bring it to the masses, and set the basic mechanics for which future titles would be compared (eg: Banjo Kazooie, Jak and Daxter), that makes it a landmark title.

Just like I wouldn't claim Arkanoid to be the first 'breakout' game, but they re-invented it, brought it back into the mainstream, and games of this ilk are often called 'Arkaniod clones' now. Same difference.

Give me facts, not myth.
Like you'd know what a fact was if is were wearing a flashing neon "fact" sign, walked up to you, slapped you in the face and said: "hey, I'm a fact. Could you direct me to the nearest fact convention?"

Oh dear. How naive. You think they make games because people want them? No. You make a product and tell people it's what they want. It's a big difference - and before you attempt to blow it out of the water - consider EA's products and their sales figures. Get my point?
Nope, I don't think their exclusive reason for making games is because people want them. I merely claim it is a factor. ..In the case of stuff like Zelda, I would claim it is a *big* factor. Personally I hate that series. But I know people who live for Zelda, and will buy an nintendo *console* just for those.

Obviously the equations for commercial success are a tad more complex than you thought I was saying. Microsoft and Electronic Arts are beautiful examples of crap product doing well. ...And they don't even always get away with telling us what we want all the time. Microsoft Bob would be a good example. Waverace on the Gamecube was a good example for me. They screwed it up, IMHO. End result: I never bought a Gamecube.

Yep, I remember Pikman when it was called Lemmings. I remember Nintendogs when it was called Little Computer People. I remember the DS when I look at any palmtop with a stylus and Minesweeper on it in the last decade.
Yeah, others have already picked up on the stupidity of the Pikmen/Lemmings statement. Gee, in gaming, where there are millions of examples of prior art, who would have thought these 3 might have elements similar to past titles? ..colour me amazed.

Haven't seen the plamtop making much of a dent in the gaming market. And who would have thought the stylus would make for a good gaming controller before the DS? ..If anyone else were trying to brind analogue control to a handheld it would have been a stick (eg: PSP.) And it wouldn't work as well (eg: PSP) :) (Nice try Sony .. hopefully you can get all the buttons working next time too.) ;)

We'll see come next generation of handhelds. Innovation, to me, means a lasting improvement...Yeah, the stylus might not last. Doesn't mean it wasn't innovative (nice try to claim it isn't with that 'lasting' clause) :) ..Just like bringing the analogue controller back to consoles, or the rumble pack. No nintendo does't innovate at all. Lets look to MS for that (which I could live with), or *cough* Sony (which would be a horrible painful death..) :D

Anyway, interesting rant. Next time bring a clue to the table.

Player 1

11-15-2005, 12:03 AM

Holy shit. So many goal posts moved in so many different directions just so you guys can feel right. Every counter to my post is presented from pretty much every conceivable perspective other than the one it was delivered. It's like you guys are deliberately trying to avoid the issue.

But, hey, that's precisely what you're doing.

It's such a shame that if you could actually READ what I said and the FACTS of what goes on in this industry rather than your romanticised and prejudiced ideas of what you think goes on (cos, yeah, you read it on some N-blog) then you'd have a clue.

You guys can keep dreaming your dream. When you wake up, I'll be happy to continue.

Now, get back to your EA and Sony bashing and calling Jack Thompson names. There's a whole industry that'll die if you stop and think before you act. Can't have that can we?

Goronmon

11-15-2005, 07:32 AM

JazGalaxy

11-15-2005, 07:48 AM

honestly.. what does that even mean? That was a whole paragraph rant full of gibberish. Congratulations for talking that long and saying nothing.

JazGalaxy

11-15-2005, 07:51 AM

Quake was the first fully 3d game...

Ohh you were talking about consoles?? mmmmm

I meant the first fully 3d platform game, console OR PC. But, yeah, Quake was not the first fully 3D game by a longshot. I was playing a game by Infogrames many many many many moons before that, that had you playing as a polygonal triangle navigating a 3D maze sort of thing. And I'm positive Virtua Racing predates Quake for another.

JazGalaxy

11-15-2005, 07:55 AM

Here's to your debate Found at wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_game)

Jumping Flash! is your first true free roam platformer, but it was in first person. Mario64 redefined what it was to be a 3D platformer, the first with camera control, free roam, objective, and interactive environments, according to the source.

Tombraider released in the US Sept 15, 1996
Mario64 released in the US Sept 26 1996 BUT

Mario64 released in JAPAN June 1996.

Anyone got a date on tombraider in Japan?

Jumping Flash wasn't really a platform game. I mean, yes you jumped, and yes there were flatforms to jump ON, but it was, as you mentioned, first person and much more like... I dunno... mechwarrior than Mario.

I remember that September when Tomb Raider Crash bandicoot and Mario64 came out very well. Crash would count as 2.5D, and so yeah... Mario beats out Tomb Raider by a few months.

So then... if we discredit Jumping Flash, which I do, Mario64 WAS the first 3D platforming game, correct?

AniAko

11-15-2005, 08:02 AM

NO!!!!!! There's no more flaming?!?!?!?! This post will die without flaming!!!!!!!

Must....keep....gaming...war....going...

Nintedno sucks!
Microsoft eats donkey-dong!
Sony rapes young gamers mothers!
Rare is a bunch of turn-coats!
SiliconKnights games are crap!
ElectronicArts enslaves goog talent to re-produce crappy games!
Capcom is beating a dead horse with it's Street Fighter franchises!

*Huff-puff...Huff-puff*
Man it's hard work hating everything....

Here's a paradox... I hate the playstation, but I own a PSP, and all of my consumer electronics are Sony. :eek: :eek: :eek:!!!! OMG!?!?! Can I think that a console is crap, that a company is crap, and accuse a company of shady tactics and still own their products? Woah!

For the record, I like all the companies mentioned above, but EA get's on my nerves as well as the playstation.

AniAko

11-15-2005, 08:06 AM

Jumping Flash wasn't really a platform game. I mean, yes you jumped, and yes there were flatforms to jump ON, but it was, as you mentioned, first person and much more like... I dunno... mechwarrior than Mario.

I remember that September when Tomb Raider Crash bandicoot and Mario64 came out very well. Crash would count as 2.5D, and so yeah... Mario beats out Tomb Raider by a few months.

So then... if we discredit Jumping Flash, which I do, Mario64 WAS the first 3D platforming game, correct?

I will be so bold to say yes, but that's because mario64 re-defined 3D platformers. It's predecessors were in fact 3D platformers, albeit not great ones. It was when mario64 filled the gaps the other platformers were missing that Mario64 defined the genre. I guess you could say it was the dawn of THE 3D platformers.

I meant the first fully 3d platform game, console OR PC. But, yeah, Quake was not the first fully 3D game by a longshot. I was playing a game by Infogrames many many many many moons before that, that had you playing as a polygonal triangle navigating a 3D maze sort of thing. And I'm positive Virtua Racing predates Quake for another.

Actually Spasim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spasim) is claimed to FIRST 3D first person shooter game dated in 1974 (http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/spasim.html)

Magnanimous Gnome

11-15-2005, 09:03 AM

*Finishes popcorn and changes channels*

Magnanimous Gnome is right

No arguments here. ;)

BTW, it's snowing outside today - I guess that whole Inevitable Winter thing is upon us.

This is why people named gnome piss me off so much. They swear to fucking much. Assholes.

Look who's talking, you pink taco fucking freak. Fuck off you fucking commie bastard. :D

*hugs Taco* Let's hold hands around the world guys! Or not...

Holy shit. So many goal posts moved in so many different directions just so you guys can feel right. Every counter to my post is presented from pretty much every conceivable perspective other than the one it was delivered. It's like you guys are deliberately trying to avoid the issue.

But, hey, that's precisely what you're doing.

It's such a shame that if you could actually READ what I said and the FACTS of what goes on in this industry rather than your romanticised and prejudiced ideas of what you think goes on (cos, yeah, you read it on some N-blog) then you'd have a clue.

You guys can keep dreaming your dream. When you wake up, I'll be happy to continue.

Now, get back to your EA and Sony bashing and calling Jack Thompson names. There's a whole industry that'll die if you stop and think before you act. Can't have that can we?

Translation:

My points are shit. I don't really have anyway to refute the logic presented to me. I'm going to go off and cry now while hugging my copy of Madden06, which is innovative and comes from a great company that doesn't lie and cheat like that evil Nintendo.